benefits bill and she has voted against the post-9/11 bill. all of this at the same time that she has voted nine times to increase her own pay. i couldn't let you get away with that, congress woman bono mack. >> thank you. i wish i had a lot more time to talk about this than that. but once again, this is very sad. i do not know who dr. use is, but all of this information about what he stood for, that will be online by the end of the night, if it's not already. please go to it and look it up yourself. let me just say this about libya. let me say how important this is, not just what happened, but how it happened. first of all, ambassador stevens wrote to the secretary of state and others and said i know mr. are al qaeda cells here in libya, and i don't feel

safe. those pleas were ignored. why did that happen? this white house and people like dr. ruiz, who are sympathizers and apologists for the greatness of america still believe that -- they believe that actually, if we apologize to our opponents, if we're just nice to them, they'll be nice to us in return. because of this our country is less safe, it is a much more dangerous place today than it was four years ago. >> thank you, congresswoman. dr. ruiz, you have 30 seconds to rebut. >> congresswoman continues to speak the language of gridlock. this is clear evidence why congress is broken. now, over and over she will repeat this incident in the city of plymouth, and it's a shame, it is a shame, it is a shame that you are trying to make me seem like i'm anti-american. >> six years, six years, six years. >> the beauty of america, for which my father and your uncles went to war for were to protect

our ability to give voice to our american heritage to, give them a voice in our american story, congresswoman. >> all right, thank you, dr. ruiz. next question. >> congresswoman, this is for you -- two years ago you told the "desert sun" that it was in our best interest that the united states remain in both iraq and afghanistan. last months you told the veterans that if president obama couldn't outline a clear and concise explanation of why troops remain in afghanistan, then the u.s. should "get the hell out." what prompted such a change in perspective, and if the u.s. pulled out immediately, how do you address concern that the enemy will fill the void? >> let me go back to a little bit more thorough reporting than that. and the article is there. but what i did say is as long as president obama cannot articulate to the american people why we are there and what we are doing, but allowing our troops to flounder because he feels comfortable because he has given a timeline for

withdrawal, that troubles me greatly. under this presidential leadership, yes, i am concerned about our troops being deployed in afghanistan, absolutely. but you know what else troubles me about this timeline of president obama's, which is an arbitrary political timeline? he didn't get that from the generals, he got it from his political advisors. let me tell you what troubles me the most. you know, i think women are more concerned about security than anything else right now. nobody -- and i have to tell you last night i was a little dismayed, after joe biden was busy defending iran and even paul ryan's answer on this was a little bit incomplete for me, too. nobody has said to the american people what i need to know when we pull out our troops from afghanistan, are we safer off as a nation than when our troops were there? will al qaeda once again have the ability to take root in afghanistan and once again launch a terrorist attack against us? he needs to answer that question. he doesn't care. all president obama wants to do is have a political timeline because it makes him feel good. >> all right, congresswoman,

thank you. dr. ruiz, you have one minute to replay. >> she once again speaks a big game, but has failed to really lead in this manner. one is you voted to get us into iraq and president obama got us out and also, he killed osama bin laden. and al qaeda right now is the weakest it's ever been. but we cannot -- we cannot let our guard down. we have to go after the terrorists and make sure they never strike again. and we have to ensure that there are no growing cells anywhere in the world and make sure that we have our resources there. now, she talks about our veterans and our soldiers. we need to bring home our troops from afghanistan, but more importantly, we need to respect our troops that are in combat and harm's way. you voted to freeze their combat pay. you said no to an increase in pay for our soldiers who risk

their lives for us, yet you voted nine times to increase your pay. >> thank you, dr. ruiz. congresswoman, you have 30 seconds. >> we all know not all bills that come out of congress are good. our overall record is absolutely supporting our troops and an increase in pay, absolutely. but what startles me and frightens me about you, too, dr. ruiz, is this -- we are not safer today because osama bin laden is dead. you and your sympathizers would like to say that we are, but libya is proof that we are not. president obama, yes, would like to tell the american people everything's cool now. that is why they lied about the cover-up in libya. that is why they denied the fact that it was a terrorist attack in the beginning. that is why they blamed america and american film, stupid film, i would add, but that is why they blamed a film. they blamed america before they blamed the terrorists. >> thank you so much. now, elizabeth. >> another question for you, dr. ruiz -- in 1998, the first year the congresswoman was elected, then house speaker, newt gingrich, pledged to save

the sult tans fee. yet they admitted that lawmakers have not made enough progress. we have not heard you address the issue on the campaign trail, what would it take to move the issue beyond just rhetoric and empty promises? is there a point where the federal government seizes control of the project? dr. ruiz? >> thank you for bringing this up, because it really brings very pleasant memories of my father taking me there to fish and havin picnics with the family. now we're seeing dead fish and a stink that is unbearable. and this is somewhere where congresswoman has failed to deliver. she continues to talk a big game. she promised in her first election that she would fix the sea. 14 years later it has not been fixed. i don't know what stippings more, a broken promise or the sultan sea. in fact, this is a great opportunity right now for us to

revive that sultan sea so that we can have it as a hot spot for tourism, so that other children can fish with their fairs, so we can develop geothermal energy and boost our economy. and the way we're going to go about doing it is public/private partnerships with local input and authority so that we can come together and stop this bickering and attack talk and all this other stuff that congresswoman bono mack is so adept at and skilled, but really come up with some problem-solving solutions. and that's what's missing in congress, and that's what's missing in congresswoman bono mack. >> all right, thank you, dr. ruiz. congresswoman, you have one minute. >> thank you. first of all, let me go to this constant bickering that i'm hearing about bickering. you have done nothing, dr. ruiz, at all to take responsibility. you haven't even had a plan for the sea until now that it's been asked of you. clearly you don't understand the complexities of the sea.

i would love to know what your thoughts are on the quantification settlement agreement. how do we take control from the state of california? this is what it's all about, dr. ruiz. i and others, including partners like senator feinstein, senator denise due chaney have also been working very hard on the salt and sea. time is of the essence. right now is an opportunity to finally get the support of neighboring communities, all the way to the city of los angeles. i've called for two congressional hearings as soon as possible into the matter of the salt and sea. but dr. ruiz, this thing you're bickering about bickering is getting old. i'd like to point to people -- >> time, congresswoman. >> thank you. >> dr. ruiz, you have 30 seconds. >> yes. this is another example of a failed promise and failure to lead. she's had 14 years and we see she is still talking about the same thing. nothing has happened. nothing has got done. the other thing is -- and i

think one of the reasons is because you're so out of touch, you're so out of sight. you're harder to find than waldo unless people pay to see you. it's very difficult. so we have to make sure that we have true leadership and bring people together in a forum, you know, so that we can start solving this problem. >> all right, thank you so much. we're continuing along now. erica with the next question. >> congresswoman, the tenor much the campaign has certainly changed in recent weeks. dr. ruiz's campaign has painted you as an out of tutch beaurocrat who shows disdain for the district by joking with the radio host who describes a district as a third-world toilet. you've described dr. ruiz as further to the left than and recently uncovered that ruiz was arrested while protesting in college. do you think he's been unfair and how do you respond to the attacks on your own character? >> thank you, erica, gravity question. as i said in my popping statement i thought we'd go

into this debate debating the issues. but clearly dr. ruiz's character is definitely worth looking at. i'm very, very frightened by what i've seen. he said it was an incident a few moments ago, that he had an incident. he had six years where he led protests, demanding that people crush plymouth rock and all that it stood for. by the way, i'm wondering, even to the press i'll ask the question -- he said it was police brutality, it was their fault. they were the bad guys, they were the aggressors. but then he signed -- and we have the signed statement from dr. ruiz that retracted that, that there was no police brutality. i don't knowly is. this to me is critically important. let me explain why this matters. other than the fact that yes, he said crush plymouth rock and all that it stands for and led these protests. questions come up when you're a member of congress that are critically important, questions like this -- do you support reading a terrorist his miranda rights? that's one.

another one dosh do you support trying a terrorist in the city of new york? that's two. these are very important questions. the character that dr. ruiz has exemplified during his six years at harvard medical school are very troubling. it's absolutely important that the people of this district know who he is. >> all right, doctor, one minute. >> you know, she says she wants to talk about the issue and her opening statement was pretty much a complete accusation and she's sticking to the accusation, which is completely false. congresswoman, read the investigation, ok? i got arrested for protecting a native-american elder. now, the other thing is that all the charges were dropped. the city paid $100,000 for native american scholarship funds. they erected two plaques in connection with their heritage. you bring up something in the past to cover up your disdain of the present.

you laugh at the poverty of people in your district and called it a third-world toilet. you showed disdain to our seniors, our middle class and students, and now native-americans. i'm appalled. you want to charge our seniors $6,000 a year for a private voucher coupon care for their medicare. and now you're running away from that. you're also taxing the middle class under the ryan plan. that is disdain today. >> all right, dr. ruiz. so do you want a 30-second rebuttal of the campaign? >> of course, i do. this is critically important. was there police brutality or was there not? was it an elder or a child? these things, folks, are in the press. they are in "the boston herald," they are in the harvard newspaper. they are documented. they are written. they're spelled out for people to see. it is critically important that people know that who he's saying he is right now is not who he is. further, what i said in that

email message was that the city councilman should have been held accountable for allowing durhamville to be the third-world condition that it was and that it continues to be. have your party release the entire interslew. -- interview. release the interview that exonerates me. >> we're down to the last couple of questions. elizabeth, you have the floor. >> dr. ruiz, in 2010 a bipartisan federal commission unveiled the plan to cut the nation's deficit by $4 trillion through a mix of tax increases and spending cuts. the plan was never voted on in congress. do you agree with any or all with what the commission came up with? what other efforts do you think the country needs to take on to cut the country's debt, which now exceeds $16 trillion? >> debt and our deficit are very important issues that we need to tackle and they're a matter of national security. and this is one of the starkest contrasts between congresswoman

bono mack and myself. you see, congresswoman bono mack wants to put the deficit and the burden of our debt on the shoulders of our seniors, our middle class and our students. by turning medicare into a private voucher system and charging our seniors $6,000 a year for their health care costs on average, by cutting pell grants and stafford loans who rely on those for their college education and she's voted to increase taxes on the middle class through the ryan plan. all of this in order to keep tax breaks for multi-millionaires and tax breaks and subsidies for corporations who ship jobs overseas. we're going to reduce the deficits by bringing home our troops from afghanistan, by making sure that we create jobs right here in the district, by making sure that we decrease taxes on the middle class and small businesses, and by allowing medicare to negotiate drug prices with our

pharmaceutical companies so that we can tackle the real problem, which is our health care costs and eliminate unnecessary procedures and redundant tests. >> all right, thank you, dr. ruiz. congresswoman, you have one minute. >> i don't think he understood the question, because what he just said, he's going to reduce the debt by not having so many medical tests, which, by the way, is a major part of obama care. obama care is what cut medicare by $716 billion on. let me tell you a few specific things i would do immediately to cut the debt. first of all, i would repeal obama care as quickly as possible. secondly, i would defund the high-speed rail in central california, which nobody wants, nobody thinks we can afford, nobody wants to pay for it. i would look for agencies like the n.e.a. and p.d.s. and, yes, it's time for you to make it on your own. not only that, i would do everything we could again. get that debt down. lower those interest rates. lower the interest that we're paying every single day. everybody pays that, the middle

class, every single person, senior, young and old. i'm tired out of hearing dr. ruiz it's always one group of people against another. you know, we can save medicare, dr. ruiz. i know we can save it. we can save it for this generation, we can save it if you're 55 and over. but you know what else, dr. ruiz? we can save it for our generation and our children's generation and our grandchildren's as well, but not by ignoring the problem. >> thank you, congresswoman. dr. ruiz, you have 30 seconds to respond. >> congresswoman bono mack thinks the idea of saving medicare is to charge our seniors and she's made this statement about obama care cutting $716 billion in medicare benefits. that's simply not true. there were cost savings. in fact, congresswoman bono mack voted for those exact same savings under the ryan plan. and in the words of president clinton, it takes some nerve to attack something that you voted for yourself. now what we need to do -- and this is a clear example. she wants to balance the deficit on the shoulders of our

seniors, middle class and our students, while protecting tax breaks for multimillionaires and corporations that ship jobs overseas. >> dr. ruiz, thank you so much. we go to the last question of the night. erica, you have the honors. >> congresswoman, critics have described bolt of you as politicians who will simply vote in lock-step with your political party leadership. can you name some policies that president obama has implemented that you support? and dr. ruiz, when it's your turn, can you name policy points where you disagree with president obama? >> thank you, erica, sure. i support the bills that i passed out of the house and got passed out of the senate and made it to the president's desk and signed into lot. the safety improvement act is one. i support other bills that he has passed that he has supported. it's a lot easier for me to say what i don't support. we haven't talked about energy. i need to get energy because it's so critically important, so i am going to pivot.

president obama wants to kill the keystone pipeline. how far in the world is he going to increase our energy supply by killing the keystone excel pipeline? yes, i disagrees with him on that. let me tell you something else. president obama does not meet with the congress. he doesn't even meet with republicans. he doesn't talk to republicans. when they pass obama care, they did it without any republican votes. they actually made a point, when i said to my colleagues i would love to work with you, because a lot of the parts of health care improvement i believe in. you know what was said to me by one of my colleagues? are you kidding? if nancy pelosi knew i talked to you, she would kill me. that is what we're up against. let me tell you do i support a lot of obama's initiatives? no. if i were to cast my vote tomorrow, my absentee ballot would be for romney. >> thank you very much. dr. ruiz, you have a minute, and you can talk about either things you would support or things that you would not support. >> this is a very important

question, and i really want the people who have been viewing this debate tonight to really see that she has clearly demonstrated why congress is broken. imagine working in a committee with this type of language and language of gridlocks and attacks. now, i do not believe that we should eliminate the bush tax cuts for those that make over $250,000 a year. we should eliminate those only for those making $1 sml or more. i also don't agree with president obama increasing the premiums for our veterans and their tricare insurance. you see, this is something that's very important. congresswoman bono mack has gone washington. she speaks her party line like no other. and i am not running for the democratic party, i am not running for nancy pelosi or president obama, i'm running for you right here in this

district as a public servant. i will always run for you. and she continues to ask, who am i? i was humbly given the person of the year by "the desert" magazine. i was given the humanitarian of the year by the rancho mirage chamber of commerce. i've always been a public servant and stood up hard for the residents of this district and i will do so for our seniors, our middle class and our students right here. >> thank you, dr. ruiz. congresswoman, you have one minute for this rebuttal. >> oh, thank you. i actually don't know quite what to say to that rebuttal, because i have no idea what he stands for. he's saying something here again today, but folks, please go online and research it for yourself. it really is appalling that all of the research and the data about who you were -- you know, again, let me remind people -- 2002, dr. ruiz, you led a protest while we had our troops in afghanistan. 2002 your cohorts said we stand

with the people of afghanistan and palestine. is that worth smiling about, dr. ruiz? i don't think it's worth smiling about. but i think that's very, very, very serious. people need to know that. you know, it is important to recognize your very first vote, unless you want to say otherwise, and i'll gladly defer the time to you, that your very first vote would be for nancy pelosi for speaker. is that true? or is it not true? >> dr. ruiz, would you like to respond? >> she asks a question i would like to bring up, the issue of, once again, she knows how to attack, but she doesn't know how to create solutions. >> can you answer the question, though? >> no. what i want to talk about is she made a very important issue about non-discrimination in the workplace, that she has protected that. in fact, you voted for the lilly led better act which would ensure equal pay for women and you voted against that. so i can't let you get away with all these false claims that you're making. >> doctor, i know you've never

been in business, you don't understand what it's like. women get paid. there are equal-pay laws. i'm rebutting, if i might. >> every physician -- >> dr. ruiz, let her finish. congresswoman, please. >> the people are concerned about security, they're concerned about national security. they're concerned about domestic security. they want to know they can pay their bills. the lilly led dth better pay act was strictly out of nancy pelosi. you didn't answer the question if you would vote for nancy pelosi or not. we know the answer. >> we could go on for hours clearly, but unfortunately the hour is quickly coming to a close many time now for the last words from our candidates. dr. ruiz, you're up first. >> thanks again to "the desert sun" for hosting this debate and a special thanks to those of you who devoted time to watching it. engaged and informed voters are so essential to a successful democracy. as candidates we owe it to you to tell you who we are and

where we differ. the freedom to disagree and speak our mind is the most american of traditions and values. but there is a big difference between disagreeing and character assassination. congresswoman, i disagree with your views and priorities, but i don't question your patriotism. i think it's a shame that you question mine. that's at the heart of what's wrong with washington. how do you expect to solve america's problems if you don't even believe in the right of your opponents to express their views without calling them un-american? the congresswoman and i do have very different vureks and we heard a lot of them tonight at their core. the differences are about who we stand up for. the congresswoman stands up for billionaires and companies that ship jobs overseas at the expense of the middle class and retirees. we've all heard a lot about job creators tonight, and congresswoman bono mack likes

to use ha phrase in previous talks as a debating weapon and in her speeches as if anyone were actually against creating jobs. we're all for job creation. the problem is that congresswoman bono mack has lost touch with who the real job creators are. i think our teachers who give our kids the skills they need to go to college and get a job, i think they are job creators. but congresswoman bono mack voted to cut education by $115 billion. i think a middle-class family that can afford to buy a house is a job creator, especially in our area where construction is such an important part of the economy. but the ryan budget that congresswoman bono mack voted for would have increased taxes on the middle class by $1,400 a year. i think a company that hires american workers is a job creator, but congresswoman bono mack voted to give tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas. and to add insult to injury, she spent over $80,000 of

taxpayer money on her own luxury car and voted nine times to raise her own pay. washington has changed miri bone no mack and she's lost touch with the people she's supposed to represent -- the seniors who count on medicare and social security, the families that work hard every day to build a better life for their children, the homeowners trying to make the next mortgage payment. those are the people i want to give voice to. i would be honored to have your votes. god bless you and god bless america. >> all right, thank you, dr. ruiz. congresswoman, you have the last word tonight. >> thank you. i'd like to thank "the desert sun" for hosting tonight's debate and thank all of you who are watching at home tonight. i want to thank you for the support you've given me and the tremendous honor of being your congresswoman. we all know that today america faces tough challenges. the world is dangerous and unstable. economies are failing.

america's unemployment rate is too high, and our quality of life is shrinking. we can and we must do better. i believe in america. i believe in our people and i believe in our future. we faced difficulty times before and we've always come through better and more united, and we will again. there are so many stark differences between my opponent and me. the most fundamental difference is how we view the role of government. i believe free markets and the free people go hand-in-hand. government should be a guardian of our freedoms and our liberties, because individual freedoms must be protected. my opponent not only believes in a bigger government, he has campaigned donors who illustrate just how far to the left he is willing to go. nancy pelosi has poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into his campaign. he has received financial support from sean penn, a man who's close to the venezuelan districttor, who is no friend of america. dr. ruiz received support from an infamous billionaire family

who has poured millions into radical left wing causes throughout the world. dr. ruiz represents one the most far-left candidates to ever seek a congressional office. his history and his involvement with radical groups are shocking. but i want your support and your vote not because of everything that is wrong with dr. ruiz, but because you and i share a belief about what is right with america. we know that by controlling government spending, reducing taxes and eliminating the overreach of government we will unleash the spirit and the power of american small businesses and entrepreneurs. freedom, free markets and a free people will always prevail. i ask you tonight for your vote so together we will continue to build and fight for a better america. that is my commitment to you. thank you, god bless you, and may god continue to bless the united states of america. >> all right, thank you, congresswoman. and we'd like to thank conchwoman mary bone no mack and dr. ruiz for -- bono mack

and dr. ruiz for joining us tonight. we thank you for your time in this very important debate in this very important upcoming election. again, it doesn't matter who you vote for, but vote for sure on november 6, cast that ballot. >> we'd also like feedback on our facebook pages. i want to thank my fellow panelists as well for joining us tonight and helping us prepare the questions and, of course, my co-anchor, liz belt, for getting in there and putting this all together. i want to thank everybody here at krmi 6 and thank the both of you for coming don't. we really do appreciate it. we wants that thank you for watching. more debate later tonight on our stations. on krmi 6.com.

thank you so much for watching and we'll see you back here tonight at 11:00. >> good night. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> you can watch this debate for california's 36 congressional districts here again tonight at 2:00 a.m. eastern, a 11:00 p.m. pacific. >> can we focus on the issues and not the personalities? if we can take a poll here with the folks, i think there is a need to focus at this point on

needs. >> how do you respond? >> i agree with him. >> let's talk about these issues. let's talk about the programs. in the presidency, a lot goes into it. caring goes into it. the strength goes into it. those are not specific. standing up against aggression is not specific. this is what a president has to do. in principle, i will take your point and think we ought to discuss child care or whatever else it is. >> i will take the pledge, because i know the american people want to talk about issues and not tabloid journalism. just for the record, i don't have any spin doctors, i don't have any speech writers. i make those charts you see on

television. [laughter] you don't have to wonder if it is me talking. it what you see is what you get and if you don't like it, you have two other choices. >> ross, in fairness, i have worked on these things for 12 years and i am the only person up here that has not been part of washington in any way the last 20 years. i don't want the implication to isthat something we've said cooked up by somebody else. i am just as sick as you are by having to wake up and figure out how to defend myself every day. >> what is the first town halls from our archives, starting saturday. senator john mccain and senator barack obama from 2008. george w. bush and vice president al gore from 2000.

and then bill clinton, george bush and ross perot. then watch president obama and governor romney in their town hall debate. >> dean heller and shelley be rkley is a toss-up. this is held at pbs studios and is about 50 minutes. ♪ >> good evening and welcome to the 2012 that a u.s. senate debate brought to you by the broadcasters foundation in partnership with the broadcasters' association. we want to welcome our national audience. and the 36 nevada television stations and radio stations carrying the debate. tonight's debate is being translated into spanish.

i will serve as your moderator for this important political event. joining me is republican u.s. senator dean heller and democratic congresswoman shelley berkley. we want to thank everyone that is providing this block of time as a public service to our communities. the broadcasters feel in obligation to engage the electorate and inform the voters. the format has been accepted and agreed to by both campaigns. each candidate will get a minute and half opening and closing statements. the candidate will be asked a series of questions, some of which were submitted by viewers and listeners in the state of nevada. the candidate that receives the question will be given one minute and 30 seconds to respond. the second candidate will receive a minute to respond at the first candidate will have a

minute to rebut. it was determined by the flood of and about a quarter that the first statement will be offered by representative shelley berkely. ley. >> i want to thank everybody for hosting us this evening and i want to thank mitch for moderating. my family lived in a small town in upstate new york. my dad decided that he would move for a better life. we went with everything we owned in a u-haul. we were headed to california and stock in nevada for the night and never left. my father was a waiter. he put food on the table, close on our back, two daughters through college and not so bad on a waiter's salary.

i was the first in my family to go through college. i worked as a waitress and a keno runner, a shoe shine girl. i know what it is like to struggle and i know what it is like to live paycheck to paycheck. it is not so much that i grew up in las vegas, i grew up in the state of nevada. we made a life for ourselves and i think that i am running for the indicted states senate home because it is my job to make sure that future generations that are coming up behind me have the same opportunities my family had. >> senator heller. >> i want to thank pbs, sponsors, and my opponent for being here this evening. i grew up with five brothers and sisters and i raised four children of my own.

i learned that an early stage is more important to listen that it is to talk. that is what i have done. there are concerns about staying in their homes and keeping their jobs. senior citizens are worried about health care and about if the doctor is even going to accept medicare and the future. they are worried about this fiscal cleiff. there are real issues with real people. i believe i will supply those real solutions. the result may be different, but i want to change the dialogue of this particular debate. a challenge for myself and my opponent for us to discuss these issues. we treat voters like adults. if we can do that, i think we will increase the dialogue here and i think that is what nevada

desert. >> you have the first question. for the second year in a row, you received a dishonorable mention from citizens for responsibility and ethics in washington because of your actions proposed cuts in medicare reimbursement rate for candy doctors -- kidney doctors. even though people believe this is legal and ethical, if you had to do it over again, do you wish you would either disclose your husband's connection more fully, or possibly abstained from voting? >> thank you. i could not have lived with myself if i knew that things were happened without me being involved in them. my only concern is for the well- being and the health of the patients in the state of nevada. i introduced 114 pieces of

health-related legislation, or i sponsored or co-sponsored them. 114 were related to kidneys, others for osteopetrosis, breast cancer, lung disease and heart disease. i think that demonstrates that my concern for all diseases and all patients that had any one of these diseases -- i could not have done more to make sure that people knew that my husband was a kidney specialist. we have a health care crisis in this country and if we don't take care of our crisis now, it is only going to get worse. i understand the needs of the patients in this state, and it is my job as a member of congress to work for them, stand with them, and fight for the

resources they need so that they can get healthier and they can live a long and healthy lives. that was my only concern. >> how do you wish you hadn't disclosed your husband's connection more fully or possibly abstained from voting? >> i don't think i could have had done more and i don't think i should abstain. the people of the state of nevada elected me to stand for them and fight for them. 114 pieces of health lated legislation. it is important that we take care of people with osteoporosis, breast cancer, lung disease, and kidney disease. i think it was the appropriate thing for me to do as a member of congress that cares passionately for the health and well-being of the people that she represents. >> i think this is an issue that has played itself out.

if you want more information, go to the new york times. one thing we do agree on is the fact that we need to reform the health-care system in this country. i don't believe obama care is moving in the right direction. how the affordable care act is the process by which we make sure all americans have the same bad health care. i don't think that is what we deserve. i think it was wrong when the president said you can keep your doctor. everybody was listening to the dialogue. within five years, you will be taken away from your doctor. and you will be thrown into a government pool and the government will decide who the doctor is that you will see. we agree we need to reform it, we just have a philosophical differences about how to do that and obama care was the wrong way to do it.

>> there were parts of the health care bill that i thought were very important and worth voting for. we reigned in the worst excesses' of insurance companies, we eliminated the pre-existing conditions and eliminated lifetime caps and enable people to keep their children on their health insurance to the age of 26. let's talk about aerial attack on health care right now. my opponent voted twice to and medicare by turning it over to private insurance companies. that is not the way you fix medicare, that is how you destroy medicare because it will increase the cost by $6,400 a year. it is going to explode the cost of prescription medication and it is -- it puts private insurance company bureaucrats between doctors and patients.

>> you have the next question. senator reid said he failed represent nevada and drafting online poker legislation that would protect about opposing interests. he said i cannot stand by while you abdicated responsibility as a u.s. senator representing nevada. how do you respond the statement and given the tone of his criticism, how will you ever be able to work with him on any piece of legislation? >> i will tell you right now that senator reid and die where different uniforms. he is a democrat and we are fighting for the makeup of the united states. he got involved in this race and that is fine. i will tell you this, we agree on pushing this piece of legislation through. we will continue to work together. i think this was his last best chance to get involved in this race. i believe i have to opponents.

the congresswoman and senator reid. i am ok with that because i will continue to push forward. we will get a bill passed before the end of the year and i will do that with the support of senator reid. at the end of the day, which can't have this this agreement. both senators are going to have to work together. we will put apart our differences and we will get something passed. >> have a long-time supporter of online gaming. i think it is very important because it will create good paying jobs in the state of nevada. some say as many as 1200 jobs. laws and 50d 50 jurisdictions to make it difficult to monitor on-line gaming. as an example, my opponent is failing the people of the state of nevada.

he had an agreement with senator reid and senator reid would deliver 45 votes and my opponent would deliver 15. my opponent was able to deliver zero. not one extra vote. we needed 60 votes to get it passed and he could not get a single vote on his side of the aisle. it has nothing to do with him having to opponents, it has to do with him not doing his job and understanding how important is for the people and the state of nevada. >> this is a simple solution. we will work this out and at the end of the year, we will have a piece of legislation. there was no vote, so to say there were zero votes, that was not descriptive. i was working with my colleagues in he was working with his. none of that matters. are we will have a bill before the end of the year and senator

reid and myself will get it passed. >> in 1999, you voted for a bill that deregulated the financial services industry. the bill you voted for allowed banks to get into the insurance and investment business. do you regret that vote since it has been blamed in part for the financial meltdown this country experienced in 2008? >> hi voted for the glass- stiegel bill which did give banks an opportunity to get into other areas, and it was a mistake. but let's not look back. what we need to do is bring in the worst access is of the big banks, the ones that got us into this mess in the first place. the ones foreclosing on homes. my opponent had an opportunity to rein in the worst abuses by voting for the dodd-frank

bill. unlike me, who was voting for the middle class at trying to make sense of this with regulations, they can never get a sense of this mess again. i hope we never end up with the housing crisis again likely dead. we need to make sure that we rein in the worst excesses'. he voted against any possible way of regulating them and making sure that they do what is right by the american people. let's not look back, let's look forward about how to protect the american people so we never get into this mess again and the american people suffer. because of the excess of the big banks that my opponent is supporting. >> that was a mistake, that

particular vote. i am pleased to hear that she agrees with that. senator robb and voted against the regulation. my opponent voted to be regulate, but i also believe the was the only member that didn't vote for the bailout. when the banks said we wanted to regulate, she said okay. they say, we want bailouts, she said okay. the purpose of dodd-frank is to give cover to the purpose -- to give cover to those that voted for the bailout. it is making it very difficult to keep this capital and small businesses. we are giving capital to the big banks.

>> that is absolute nonsense. we voted so we could rein in the worst access is that we discovered after the bank's put us in this position with the financial meltdown. that is why it was important. he has been supporting the banks that has got us in this mess. those of the bankers that he is supporting. when it comes to be regulation, saying we need less regulation, this is one time that maybe they needed to make sure to regulate these banks. i want us to remember -- i will leave it at that. >> according to the sun, you sponsored legislation to limit a election ballots, student aid

application to english only. you wanted to make english the official national language and you supported the bill to end birthright citizenship. please explain your position to nevada hispanics that make up 15% of the electorate. >> let me touch on dodd-frank. the purpose was to give cover. this is probably the biggest issue we will discuss. the financial institutions can't get capital because of this bill. the question to itself. i want to make sure that everybody succeeds in this country. that is the goal. that is why we continue to push english. it is important to have success in this country. one thing we can agree on is that we need immigration reform in this country. if you want to come here, should

you pay thousands of dollars to hire a lawyer and wait years in order to emigrate? the principle i am trying to push is that i want these people to succeed in this country. that is why have supported this particular proposal. >> i also had an opportunity to travel throughout the state during this election and when i speak to a latino families, they want the same things we all want. i want to make sure they have a job and job security. they want to have access to affordable health care. they are interested in passing the dream act to allow kids that came here through no fault of their own and they're going to college or are serving in our military to have it passed a legal status. he voted against that act. what he is saying is that if you

come back, we will support you. i am in favor of comprehensive immigration reform and i have never heard my opponents say that before. i think it is discriminatory and unconstitutional. that is the difference between us. >> we can agree that we need immigration reform in this country. but perhaps the greenback is not the way to get that done. republicans and democrats have to come together to solve this problem. talking about serving the military, i think you should have a pathway to citizenship. if you are working on your education, we should put you in the queue. there are ways of solving this problem. it is not black and white or else we would have solved the problem along time ago.

when i get back to washington d.c., we will work together, and we agree on 80% of the issues in that particular piece of legislation. let's make sure that we solve the problem and we get it done once and for all. we can come with a proposal that both sides can live with. >> you will take the first question on this. one of the most important duties given to the united states senator is the approval of an individual to a lifetime appointment of the u.s. supreme court. can we get a sense how you will vote? and they may current or former supreme court justice that should never have been approved by the u.s. senate. >> interesting. let me say one of my favorites ha, that would be ruth ginsberg.

she is a remarkable woman, she is a brilliant woman, she has overcome extraordinary adversity, and she does a tremendous service to all of us by serving on the united states supreme court. what i admire most is that she was on the citizens united decision which i think had a detrimental effect on our a election process by elevating corporations to the status of people or they can contribute -- i think that was a mistake. elections should be decided by the votes of the many and not by the body of a few. we have to stop his because it is bad for our democracy. the one that i think i would have not voted for would be

justice thomas. i don't think he is the dynamic member, and he is as far to the right as possible. it has a detrimental effect on the democracy of our nation and i would not have supported him. >> i just want to make it aware that i have no ideas for a supreme court justice except that they support the constitution. i have looked at our justices and had an opportunity to do that. a decision might be odd, but i think thurgood marshall. someone i have watched and studied, his background is incredible. that he has become a supreme court justice. i have a tremendous amount of respect for the rule of law. i disagreed on the affordable

care act and the decision made there, but i still respect the law. i don't think i am in a position to say who i don't think ought to be on that score. i think it is not very respectful, but i would like to see our own governor be a supreme court justice. i think he would be an incredible supreme court justice. >> will support the rule of law and the constitution, and we look during the hearings of the supreme court nominees, who would best stand-up and support the constitution of the united states. that is exactly what i will do, it's what i would have done if i had been in the united states said that before this and it is what i continue to do if i am lucky enough to win this election. dodge you voted twice for the paul ryan budget.

it would have emanated the current system of medicare for those 55 years and younger. how you explain that in 10 years, he or she is going to have to come up with an additional $6,400 a year to pay for health care that he or she is expecting to receive? >> i think your details and facts are not accurate on this, but that's ok. it we will talk about medicare. they rely on social security issue. i do want to say that we have to protect that system. yes, the particular piece of legislation and his budget coming from the house of representatives, we have that argument. at least the house passed a budget that i thought was critically important. we couldn't bring those and mash them together. $6,400 is a little excessive and

i think it was a liberal think tank that came up with $6,400 and has been touted ever since. we have to quit taking money for medicare. $716 billion was given to obama care. we have to keep taking -- quit taking money from out of the system. we need jobs in this country and we need people paying taxes. we can't have 12% unemployment and think that it is going to be healthy. frankly, i would not privatize medicare. that is not what the particular piece of legislation does. i think government ought to control it so that 55 years and younger, and have an opportunity to protect and preserve it for everybody. >> my opponent voted twice for the rye and budget and this is

what the plan does. it adds $6,400 a year for the same health care that seniors are already getting under medicare. explodes the cost of prescription medication and puts insurance company bureaucrats in between doctors and their older patients. you don't fix medicare by killing it and that is what would happen if you turn it over to private insurance companies. this is not a liberal think-tank that came up with $6,400 unless you consider the congressional budget office in liberal think tank. they came up with the number because it is accurate. the fact of the matter is you tell a 55-year-old that in 10 years, he has to come up with $6,400 to pay for the health care he is getting? that is not fair to him. >> my opponent continues to talk

about the elimination of medicare and that simply isn't the truth. nobody is standing here saying they want to eliminate medicare. it sounds like you just described obama care in the increasing cost it will have for the average family. taking that kind of money, millions of dollars out of medicare and giving it to obama care, home that is what will kill the program. medicare is going to go bankrupt if we don't do something to protect it and preserve it. is that the ryan plan? we will find a way to protect this for future generations or nobody will have it and nobody wants to see that. i think we can fix it by coming together and finding the answer to this question. >> it is estimated that the united states and doles out $24

billion annually to 29 nations rioting against the united states. u.s. foreign aid egypt where anti-u.s. demonstrations began total $1.50 billion alone, second only to israel. why do we continue to send money to countries that hate us? >> i think that is an outstanding question and i have been introducing legislation that would eliminate foreign aid to countries that are doing us harm. i introduced legislation that should read that got its peachtree the, that we would stop giving them $2 billion a year. according to camp david, the agreement was peace to egypt and israel and says that whatever we give israel, we have to give egypt.

that was foreign aid for peace. if they back away from the peace agreement, there is no reason why we should continue to give them a $2 billion a year in military aid. we should not be doing it. i have introduced legislation to make sure we don't, and i have been trying to eliminate this foreign aid the egypt for a number of years. but it has been the republicans that insisted that we continue the foreign aid payments to egypt and i don't think that we should be. i think we should end it as soon as they give any indication that they're going to end the peace treaty. gosh, it should be a gift to our friends that we build democracies and the economy. not a gift for countries that which was built. >> how about gifts to the american people? gifts to the middle class? instead of giving money to

countries that burn our embassies and kill our citizens, why are we giving them gifts? i have always describe foreign aid as taking money away from poor people in this country and giving it to rich people in poor countries. isn't our education here more important? how about the freeway between here and phoenix? talking about this particular freeway, we give some much money to foreign aid, we can be building roads and bridges, the education system. things that are important in the state of nevada. why do we continue to give billions to these foreign countries that show no respect for our values, our culture, and the american people. >> i think that you have to be very selective with our foreign aid. i had spoken earlier about and in foreign aid.

i want to remind my opponent of the importance of continuing for an aid to the state of israel. they are our strongest ally, a very dangerous part of the world. i think it is incumbent on the united states to stand with our allies and provide the resources israel needs to flourish and keep safe. the security of israel and a strong relationship is fundamental for peace not only in the middle east but throughout the world. throw out the baby with the bathwater. awayn't want to take money from the important needs of this country, but on the other hand, we want to stand with our allies, particularly the state of israel. >> governor romney wants to extend the bush tax cuts. he says his plan would not

balloon the deficit because he would eliminate loopholes but he hasn't been specific about which ones. i will ask you which ones. are you prepared to embrace the plan and eliminate deductions for mortgage interest, state and local taxes, dividends, and charitable contributions? >> let me go back to the previous question. my opponent and i stand together on israel. that is the one exception. but i continue to support israel and will continue to support israel in the future. i don't believe in gifts. as far as the question, i think the plan will create 12 million jobs in the next four years. that is what we need in america. it is what the middle class needs. i want to have a plan and what my opponent to show her plan.

you don't do that by not raising taxes. we should not be raising taxes. if small businesses understand that, they will not be able to hire. why would i hire someone today if i don't know what they will cause tomorrow? that is why i introduced no budget, no pay. they should be doing their jobs. that was true for me when i was a paper boy. if you don't do your jobs, you should not get paid. that concept has been lost in washington d.c.. >> let me ask that again. the governor romney talked about reducing tax rates and says he would not balloon the deficit. let me ask your opinion about eliminating the deductions i listed. do we have to eliminate deductions for mortgage

interest, state and local taxes, or charitable contributions? >> let me talk to you about one deduction or loophole that i have put legislation in. that is the elimination of loopholes for energy companies and oil companies. my opponent and i both agree that we should eliminate loopholes for energy companies. but she wants to give the revenue to the federal government and i want to give it to the individual at the gas pumps. when you pay for that gasoline, reducing the cost of gasoline. my parents filled up their gas tank, came to my house, and half a day later, that gas pump with 10 cents more a gallon. we can talk about loopholes and one of them is that for the oil companies. but i would give it back to the individual as a reduction of costs. quite where to

begin, but let me start with the last thing you said. he introduced the legislation and spent a lot of that lately that will reduce the costs by one penny. that is a smokescreen because he wanted to draw attention away from the fact that he voted nine times to give tax cuts tobago. millions of dollars to big oil and he will save us a penny at the pump? i don't think that is a good trade and it is pretty obvious who he is standing for her. i think we ought to have the budget, but when my opponent had an opportunity this year, he voted against every one of them and he never came up with a suggestion or a budget of his own. if you did not vote for any of the budgets, you did not bring

one of your own, why are you still taking pay? >> no budget no pay as a great idea. there is an insatiable appetite to raise taxes and not give it back. she says a penny a gallon doesn't matter and i said does matter. i will look for other loopholes to eliminate and try to give that money back to the taxpayer because that is what they need. it is amazing she is opposed to no budget no pay. she wants a pay check regardless of if we do any work. that is the problem with washington d.c.. we have not had a budget in washington d.c. as long as this administration has been in office. where have not had a budget in the senate for three years. none of the budgets that came to the floor, they never went through a committee hearing.

none of them had a hearing. i believe in the concept, we should quit paying members of congress if they are not willing to do their job. >> you mentioned gas prices, so we will talk about the keystone pipeline. with gas prices in california at only $5 a gallon, people speculate is only a matter of time that other states go through the roof. the keystone pipeline won't drive down the cost of gasoline today. what is your solution to keep the high cost of gasoline skyrocketing even further. >> this is what we have to do. we need to eliminate the tax subsidies to big oil companies. they made $137 billion. they don't need that tax money. the next thing you do after

eliminating tax subsidies is to create a product that we need. energy. export that product and create good-paying jobs. and then you build the keystone pipeline. you have to have an ironclad guarantee that the oil that is going to the pipeline stays in the united states. my opponent had an opportunity to vote for an amendment that was doing just that. that means the oil comes down the pipeline. it goes down to the gulf coast. for china, home i am interested

in lowering the cost of energy for people in the united states. to make sure that unlike my opponent, in the united states of america. >> every middle-class family understands the energy costs. a gallon of gasoline, i want to go back to $1.50 a gallon. opponent isk why for the keystone pipeline. that is 100,000 jobs for the middle class, right there. we need a whole new program in this country. if we continue to rely -- this is the problem today. they believe it is more important that we get our oil and we need to go after our own

oil. >> we apologize, we resume now about the keystone pipeline and he has 15 seconds or 20 seconds left. >> we don't have an energy policy in this country. let me give you credit for putting this backup. we talk about big bird, but there is an emergency management team in this country. >> as a number of people know, i know how an important pbs is. i will reiterate what i said earlier.

taing about an energy policy for this country, we to and tax subsidies to continue giving to big oil. we have an abundance of sun and wind and geothermal. and create good paying jobs that can't be shipped overseas. we also voted to slash investments in clean energy. that is important to our future. you make sure that the oil that goes through that pipeline stays in the united states of america. >> the mandates from washington

d.c. and the one-size-fits-all for education, do you favor that? >> let me correct something my opponent said. it is my legislation that reduces subsidies to bigger oil. the difference is, she wants to give it to government. we have 3500 bureaucrats. they are telling clark county and the rest of the state what they should do educating the children. it comes from their parents, the

teacher, and their principal. as soon as i call for a reduction, either side of the department of education. let me tell you, if she says that, it is simply not true. the education for their children who comes locally. the billions that we spend in unfunded mandates, ha let's take that and like i said, i trust them more than some bureaucrat in washington d.c.. >> and nobody understands the importance of getting a good education better than me. our kids in nevada with children from other states, they need to

children in china and india throughout the world. we need the tools to be able to compete. this is what you do. you have smaller class sizes and attract quality teachers. so that they can, and their own way and that their own speed, we can get down this drop out rate. it is impossibly high. to be able to do that, everybody has to make a living. do technical training, job training. >> my wife teaches school, education is important.

more competition, high quality, less cost. more competition and higher quality. this is a pretty good example of that. you take " more and put it on other issues, you think you're getting more competition and higher quality? think more, higher, less. more competition, higher quality, less cost. >> this question has to do with mining. it once had the support of the delegation. it would result in a hundred new

jobs and be $75,000 per person. >> i believe the most important thing you can do is open that mine. that is why i was an original cosponsor of this legislation. what happened in that legislation, none of which would have any to do with the state of nevada. i let them know, i know how important it is. >> can you say your for a bill and vote against it? in the county that has the highest unemployment in the state of nevada, i don't care. if you take pieces of

legislation, it will affect nevada. they're telling people not to vote for this piece of legislation, but i have read it. i have the senate version today. i think it is important to send that message. i hope my opponent will support that idea of creating new jobs and listening to the extreme environmentalists. >> we are with them as a delegation. i had a hand in writing that legislation as well. i am going to vote for a clean

piece of legislation and i am looking forward to it. they deserved it, they need it, i will stand with them. >> it has come time for closing statements. the ocin t -- coin toss has s helley berkley having closing statement first. >> people come to me all the time and they say, i have never missed a day of work. i lost my job, i lost my home. i think the answer to that question is what this election is all about. we stand with middle-income families and a good paying jobs. i am working to make sure we create good paying jobs. we need to make sure that people

can stay in their homes, that this debacle has been devastating for families. who is standing up with older americans by turning it over to private insurance companies and privatizing social security? and making sure that when men get equal pay for equal work. at a time that nevada families need a change, my opponent is playing for the wrong side. he is playing with the big oil companies and shipping jobs overseas. that is what got us into this mess and the first place. i asked you, if you support me, i promise that i will work for you and fight with you and stand with you for a brighter future for all of our families. >> thanks to pbs and all those

listening. i apologize for the interruption. we have four children. two of those kids are in college today. i have parents on social security and medicare. a lot like a lot of nevadans. same problems. i worry about my parents, making sure they have social security. that is a priority. i worry about their education. bigger issues that americans worry about, making sure that they have a life. someone that lives this, someone that lives this every day. someone that can talk to republicans and democrats.

and recognizes the solutions. we need someone who recognizes it on both sides. democrat plans, you have to bring both together. you have to get things done in washington d.c.. i need your vote on november 6. >> we have come to the conclusion of the night's debate. thank you to senator heller and representative berkley. thank you for being part of this event and don't forget to vote on october 20. good night. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> linda mcmahon and chris

murphy faced off in their second debate. watch their debate saturday at 4:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> c-span brings a special respect -- perspective and what is happening in washington. if something is going on in the house or the senate, and something will go on in the next five years, c-span covers this authoritatively, and it is one of the major news sources. we are all struggling. c-span with the authoritative voice on what is happening. c-span is the authoritative voice.

>> he watches c-span on comcast. c-span, created in 1979 and brought to you as a public- service by your television provider. >> vice-president biden and his wife in wisconsin at the university of wisconsin. it is the vice president's first campaign stop. it is about half an hour. ♪

>> hello, everyone. it is great to be here today. how about the kentucky debate? didn't keep you - -he do -- he do great last night? i am so proud of him. last night, i saw somebody that truly understands what is going on in people's lives. someone with the heart and experience. and someone that showed us be clear picture of the choice in this election. it is my pleasure to turn this over to someone that has been fighting hard for america that we want to live in. somebody not afraid to roll up his sleeves haagto keep moving s country forward. joe biden.

[applause] >> hello, university of wisconsin! good to see you all. good to see you all. with your permission, i would like asked the guy that can throw a hell of a pass, the great congressmen. are you there? come out, ron. i needed a passport to get into town. let me begin by thanking you. i know all of you have been waiting. thank you for waiting. i am sorry we are late for getting out here. i also wanted to recognize one of the finest guys in all of my

years in the united states senate, one of the people who -- when you say his name in washington, anyone who knows him, you say integrity. [applause] your presence is going to be missed, particularly by me. we spent a long time serving on the same committees. whenever i wasn't quite sure what i was doing her, seriously, this man has a lot of wisdom. my name is joe biden, i'm jill biden's husband. that is how i am known in

washington. jill's husband. folks, i am sure you observe last night that we had a little bit of a debate. [applause] with a gentleman, and he is a gentleman, a gentleman from wisconsin. congressmen ryan. no, no. i heartily agree with anything he says, but i think he is a decent guy with a beautiful family. a great husband and father. for that, i have great respect for him. but, you know, anybody that watched that debate, we have a fund mental-health -- a

fundamental provision difference for america. it is, quite frankly, profound. if people were listening, they know what some of those differences are and they know how those differences can fundamentally affect the direction of this country. one of those areas was an area of afghanistan. i made it absolutely clear on behalf of the president and i that we are leaving afghanistan in 2014. period. [applause] we have trained over 315,000 afghan military personnel. it is their responsibility to step up to their defense of their nation. [applause] we went for al qaeda. we went for some of the late in. we accomplished that goal. we went for osama bin laden. we accomplished that goal. and now it is time. congressman ryan made very clear that governor romney has a very different view.

although he says that he thinks we should get out in 2014, although he says that that makes sense, he says we should never have announced that and i might add, had not, the afghans would never step up, which should never have announced that and, when asked to guarantee you will get out, he says it depends. no, i'm serious. you heard it. it depends on the situation on the ground. it depends. well it depends on nothing other than the date as far as we're concerned. it is time for the afghans to take care of their own responsibilities. [applause] but like almost everything, it depends. it depends on which day you asking the question. [laughter]

it depends. it depends on the circumstances. but it was not just on foreign policy, it depends. it was also on their attitude of what constitutes a fair tax code, what is a reasonable budget, whether or not you will be cutting the budget. congressman ryan says that, even though he passed the ryan budget through the house of representatives, which did not become law, he drastically cut across the board 19%, in eviscerating education and so many other things. he said, no, no, that is not a cut. he said it is a smaller increase. i want to tell that all to your parents when they don't take a $2,500 tax credit next year if they win could tell that to the two hundred thousand kids who will be kicked off of early education. on taxes and make you go back and look, paul ryan is saying his budget really is not a budget cut. that is like governor romney standing in an unemployment line and say, i did not outsource your job, i offshore it.

that is the distinction they make. [applause] when i point out that governor romney, who is a great businessman, did the bain way, the lowest wages, the cheapest community that you can find, and then move there, offshore, outsourced jobs, they came back and said, no, no, that is not what he is doing. when i pointed out that the governor even, as governor of massachusetts, sent a call service that people in massachusetts could pick up the phone and see whether or not they were entitled to

no, serious. imagine the feeling of the guy calling and saying how about my and employment check knowing he could have that very job that the person he is calling has.

but it has been outsourced. and i said that, they said, no, biden does not understand. that is not outsourcing. that is off shoring. that is more than misleading. on taxes, you heard last night, we raised taxes 99 million times or whatever it was on a class people and small businesses. even governor romney has admitted that we have not raised taxes. we cut taxes for the middle class by $3,600. the middle class is gone a $3,600 tax cut the last three years. and now we want to make sure that we make the tax cuts for the middle class, which is due to expire in january, that we make that permanent. make that permanent. but you know what their answer is. they say no they say, no. this is literally true. they say, we will not make the tax cut for the middle class permanent unless you agree, obama and biden, to extend the tax cut for the very wealthy. we will not let the middle class have it unless the wealthy continue the tax cuts could limit this in perspective. that tax cut costs for just the wealthy is $1 trillion of the

next 10 years. $800 billion of it goes to people with a minimum income of $1 million. and this is a fact. that check it, as they say. $500 billion goes to 120,000 families making an average of $8 million a year. while the eviscerate education, while they refuse to allow tax cuts to go forward for the middle-class. ladies and gentlemen, only a man who answers the question on a good 60 minutes" as governor romney did two weeks ago, when asked by the moderator, he asked the question coming he said, do you think is fair, governor, that you pay only 14% of your $20 million in income when someone making $50,000 a year pays at a higher rate? the governor said yes. that is fair. if you have a point of view, you understand why they are so desperate to hold on to a tax cut that the wealthy are not asking for. they are as patriotic as poor folks. but they know that they don't need it and they knew it is time for them to chip in. that is all you need to know.

as to why the governor wants to make sure that the tax cuts for your parents -- unless you continue to fund a $500 billion tax-cut for 120,000 families. and the other thing that we learned is that governor romney no longer is for that tax cut that he has been talking about for the year and half, the $5 trillion tax cut. it is amazing. it evaporated. i do know where it went. he said the tax-cut he is calling for will be fully paid for. it would be fully paid for by doing away with exemptions for the very wealthy people. the one exemption, the one loophole that people usually call them, it is made clear that you cannot get rid of is the one that allows him to pay at 14%. seriously. and when asked what other loopholes will you cut -- and you heard it asked last night of congressman ryan -- he could not name one, not one.

that is why, folks, the bipartisan group called the tax policy center made up of former bush and former clinton economic experts, that is why they said that the romney-ryan tax plan would in fact raise taxes on middle-class families with a child an average of $2,000 a year. $2,000 a year. and by the way, every model looked at it from the so-called -- the american enterprise institute -- they say the same thing. taxes will have to be raised on the middle-class if they succeed with the tax cut. folks, it is time lift the burden off the middle class, not double down on the great recession that hit them. [applause]

as a consequence of the great recession, middle-class families lost $16 trillion in wolf appeared mostly in equity in their homes. they saw them evaporate and their pension plans. it is time for everyone to chip been come including the wealthy. as i said last night, we should not be surprised at their continued opposition to everyone chipping in. these other folks to talk about 47% of the american people being unwilling to take [take [booing] and by the way, the congressman being unwilling to take responsibility. [booing] and by the way, the congressmen said they are takers. these people are like my mom and dad, the neighborhoods that i grew up in 0.82% of them pay their payroll taxes and other taxes and an effective rate higher than romney pays his taxes.

over 10% of them are senior citizens on social security. the rest are military vets and military personnel fighting right now. that is the 47% that this nation depends on to build this country. it is about time governor romney takes some responsibility. [applause] take some responsibility to help the american people, the middle class, instead of lining up to sign a pledge to a guy named grover norquist, sign a pledge -- [booing] no, i tell you, it would be funny if it were not so serious. i think the vast majority of the republicans in the house have signed a pledge that we will not raise taxes $1 on the wealthy. not one.

and ladies and gentlemen, it is time romney and ryan and the republican congress to take a pledge to the middle class people saying we will level the playing field. we will get you back in the game. we will give you a fair shot again. [cheers and applause] it is time they acknowledged what got us into this trouble in the first place. they talk about this great recession as if it dropped out of the sky. where did it come from? or as my granddaughter would say, did casper the ghost do it, pop? where did it come from? it came from their policies of shredding reasonable regulations on wall street, allowing banks to write their own rules, continuing trillion dollar tax cuts for the very wealthy. that is what got us here.

and, ladies and gentlemen, take responsibility. if anybody had a doubt about what is at stake in the selection, when it comes to women's rights, and the supreme court, i am sure it was said last night. congressman ryan made very clear that he and governor romney are prepared to impose their private views on everyone else. it was made clear last night that they don't believe in protecting a woman's access to health care. it was made very clear that they do not believe a woman has a right to control her own body. that is between she and her doctor. and now they say they're willing to make an exception in the case of rape and incest. ladies and gentlemen, congressman ryan was the leader in the house who even blocked those exceptions. so folks, now these guys pledge that they will defund planned parenthood, which under law, cannot perform any abortions. you heard last night again. and after last night to make you have any doubt about the caliber and the philosophy of the justices they would appoint to

the supreme court, i imagine they are pretty well past. ladies and gentlemen, can you imagine the next president is surely to have one -- no two supreme court appointees. roe v. wade is hanging. do you think they are possibly going to appoint two justices to the court who will not join scalia and others to overrule roe v wade? ladies and gentlemen, the single most consequential decision the president makes other than going to war is the appointment of the supreme court because those appointments live on long after any president is gone. ladies and gentlemen, congressman ryan, he voted against the lily ledbetter at. it sounded to do is, but all it does is gives a woman a cause of action when she finds out that she has been cheated in her employment.

ladies and gentlemen, we're all pushing hard for a fair pact. i happen to think my daughters to get paid exactly what any man is being paid for the job she's doing. [cheers and applause] we proposed equal pay legislation. they are against it. they want to turn back to the insurance companies the decision on whether a woman continues to have to pay 50% more for the same health care.

where once again pregnancy will be able to be a preexisting condition. ladies and gentlemen, they are holding hostage one of the proudest accomplishments of my career, the violence against women act. they're still debating whether or not we need the violence against women act after 20 years. folks, if i leave you with no other message today, i want you to remember this today. barack obama and joe biden are absolutely, positively firmly committed to ensuring that our daughters and my granddaughter's have the exact same rights and opportunities to control their lives as my sons and my grandson's. [cheers and applause] the exact same right! make no mistake about that! these guys have a social policy out of the 1950's. folks, the american people have been through an awful lot the

last four years as a consequence of this great recession. but like always, the american people did not give up. they got up in the american people did not lose faith. they bought back. folks there is no quit in america. there is no quit in america. there never has been. and i have never seen two candidates in the highest office in the land were more negative about this country and its prospects than the people who we are running against. all you hear from them is talk about a culture of dependency, america in decline. you know, i don't recognize the country they talk about. i don't. not from where i come from, not where you come from. i don't see americans who think they are dependent. i see americans were looking for nothing more than a shot did they are now looking for a handout. they're just looking for a shot,

a level playing field. how can these guys have such a profound misunderstanding of the people of this country? [applause] the american people are so much better, so much stronger, so much more responsible than these guys give them credit for. and i have news for governor romney and congressman ryan america is the dependent nor is it in decline. [applause] and if they get out of the way with these policies out of the 1950's, we would be bracing that. ladies and gentlemen, my distinct message to congressman ryan tonight and to governor ryan, it is never, never, never been a good bet to bet against the american people. you always lose when you bet against the american people. [cheers and applause] folks, we need you. we need you to have as much faith as we have in the american people. we need you to stand up. we need your support. we need you to help us win wisconsin.

because when we win wisconsin, we win this election. god bless you and may god protect our troops. thank you all so much. [cheers and applause] thank you. [applause] ♪ ♪

♪

♪

♪

♪

>> mitt romney and his running mate to return to the campaign trail. they stopped at a rally and lancaster, ohio. the campaign for about 40 minutes.

♪ [cheers and applause] >> are you ready to win? we have to win, don't we? it is too important to our families, to our communities, to our country. we cannot afford another four years of barack obama. now, we all want to win, and we have to win. let me ask you something today. are you planning to do everything you possibly can in the next 25 days to ensure a victory here in the key state of ohio? [cheers] are you willing to make phone calls for mitt? are you willing to go door to door for mitt? are you willing to put up one of these signs in your yard for mitt? i need you to early vote. we need to bank the vote appeared go to your board of elections on monday morning.

you can vote and vote now. that ensures you'll have plenty of time on election day to help us get other people to vote. will you do that? [cheers] when you talk to people, friends, neighbors, folks to go to work with, folks to go to church with, you will find they are paying attention. we had two great debates in the last eight days. do you agree with me on that? [cheers] wow. the american people are seeing what this comeback team is all about. last night, we had a terrific performance by paul ryan. [cheers] folks, on the stage last night, who was the leader? it was paul ryan. [cheers] jobe biden said a lot of interesting things.

one was, in a time of increasing danger around the world, he said we ought to be cutting our military. [boos] moreid we don't need any m1 tanks. did you hear that? guess where they were made, folks? right here in the state of ohio. they are part of the great is military on the face of the earth. they will insure we have a military second to none so we can keep the peace. we need m1 tanks. say it ain't so, joe. now, we also saw on the stage last night a guy who understands how to get america back on track. just as mitt romney did last week, he explained why it was so important for us to have a change in direction and he laid out a specific agenda to move america forward. the comeback team is here and we need them and we need them now. please help me welcome the next vice president of the united states, paul ryan. [cheers and applause]

>> wow. thank you, buddy. man. way up there. how you doing? look at that. wow. o-h. [crowd yells "ohio"] i love that. it is so fun. it is great to be back here. i spent four great years in miamiville, oh, and i have my lucky buckeye with me. it said it brought him a victory in ohio and you will help us because this buckeye will bring us victory in ohio. you have a huge choice to make. we have a big choice to make. you know, i think we saw a sign of it last night just like we saw at a week ago. you see, they are offering no new ideas.

the president is simply saying more of the same. hope and change has become the attack and blame. when he was running for president four years ago, barack obama gave a huge speech in this big, a great speech he said, if you don't have fresh ideas, then use a stale tactic to scare voters. if you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as somebody people should run from.

you make a big election about small things. ladies and gentleman, that is what barack obama said of his opponent four years ago. that is exactly what barack obama has become now as president. [cheers] you know, we had a chat about libya and benghazi. we mourned the loss of these brave americans. talking about blaming, first, they blame a youtube video and a nonexistent riot, then when the country is getting upset about it, they blame romney and ryan. they keep changing their story. this is not what leadership looks like. we need clarity, not confusion. we need accountability and no more excuses. this tragedy would be troubling in and of itself, but unfortunately, what we are

witnessing when we turn on our tv is on a daily basis is the unraveling of the obama form policy. when you say, it is ok to impose these devastating cuts on our military, or, that we don't need any more lima-built m1 tanks, we are projecting weakness. our enemies are more brazen. the our allies are less willing to trust us. so while hot spots are growing abroad, the economy is not growing here at home. that is the problem we have to focus on here. you see, the economy is growing slower than it grew last year. last year it grew slower than the year before. all president obama has offered

as more of the same. we have a very big choice to make. that choice is clear. do we want more stagnation that fosters dependency or do we want a dynamic, growing economy that creates opportunity and creates jobs? [cheers and applause] in a nutshell, we need leadership. [cheers] look at the guy over my shoulder right here. if you look at this man's life story, one word comes to mind. leader. this is a man who turned around the olympics, who turned around struggling businesses, and by the way, being successful in business, that is a good thing. there is nothing wrong with that. we want more people to be successful.

we want more people to have prosperity, to have jobs, to have higher take-home pay. we want people to grow. in a jobs crisis, wouldn't it be nice to have a job-creator in the white house? this is a man who has proven to get things done. when he was governor of massachusetts, he cut taxes 19 times, he balance the budget without raising taxes. unemployment went down, household income went up. this is a man that knows how to turn things around. after getting the runaround for four years, don't you think it is time for america to have a turnaround [cheers] we will not duck these tough issues facing our country. if we don't tackle america's problems, they will tackle us. we will not spend the next four years blaming other people. we will take responsibility and get the job done.

we will not try to transform this country into something it was never intended to be. we will reapply our founding principles and make america what it was meant to be. that land of opportunity, that land of freedom and liberty. [cheers and applause] the moment is coming. it is less than a month away. we have a real leader, a perfect person where the man and the moment our meeting perfectly well. that means right here, right here in ohio, you have the ability and the responsibility and the opportunity to save this country, to get it back on the right track, and you are going to do that by electing this man, mitt romney, the next president of the united states. [cheers and applause]

>> thank you. thank you, sir. thank you. what a welcome. thank you. thank you. thank you for your senators. thank you for this great vice president. he is going to be terrific, isn't he? it is good to be back. you may say, i don't remember seeing you here before. i was here a long time ago. as a matter of fact, my very first assignment at my first job was to come to lancaster. i'm serious. trying to do a little bit of work at a company called anchor hocking.

we used to fly into columbus and then drive an hour and a half or so here. i learned something about standing next to those big glass furnaces. got real hot in there. i learned about the machines and saw an extraordinary community that came together to build a great enterprise. it is good to be back. this is our comeback team here. this is our comeback team here in ohio. we are going to bring back america. i had the fun of going back and forth across ohio and this week, i was also in florida, and iowa, i was in north carolina and virginia, and you know what? there is a growing crescendo of enthusiasm. people recognize this is not an ordinary campaign. this is a critical time for the

country. there is more energy and passion. people are getting behind this campaign. let's get this country strong again. [cheers and applause] part of that, i think, came from last night. gosh, we got to watch this guy debate. there was one person on the stage with thoughtfulness, who is respectful, who was steady and poised. there was one person on the stage you would want to be with if there was a crisis and it is this man right here. when the moderator asked how you get the economy going, one person on the stage just attacked. this guy stood up, well, he was sitting down, i guess, metaphorically, he stood up and he went through all the things you do to get this economy going. it is our plan to get this economy going with more jobs for the middle class and more take- home pay. we will put in place that plan. [cheers and applause]

now, i also had a debate about a week ago. [cheers and applause] i enjoyed that experience. we got a chance to talk about some differences between us. i got to ask the president some questions a lot of people have wanted to ask mike, why were 23 million americans struggling to find work when he took office, why instead of focusing on getting jobs, he focused on obamacare? i got to ask them, how come gasoline is so expensive? almost twice as much as when he took office. he cut in half the number of permits for drilling on federal lands and federal waters. i got to ask why it was when he called the massive deficit we have unamerican, why, when that was the case, he spent $90 billion sending money to green energy companies, many of blum

wrote by friends of his, contributors of is, and we heard what he had to say or not say. i think we boil it down to this. he said more recently, look, you cannot change washington from the inside. you have to change it from the onset. we will give him that chance. [cheers and applause] now, there were couple of places where we agreed. we agreed that we would take this country in very different directions. he points out that, actually, it was the vice president a part of the truth, they're planning on raising taxes by $1 trillion, more like $2 trillion with obamacare taxes, but the spending and the interest on the debt they amassed by virtue of their spending will do what one recent study shows, causing them to raise taxes on the

middle class. i make this commitment to you. under no circumstances will i raise taxes on the middle class of america. [cheers and applause] under his watch, we will have obamacare installed. bureaucrats can tell you what kind of health care you connect your premiums will be $2,500 more expensive. the president tells you all these three things you are getting. they come with a $2,500 extra charge. what i am going to do is repeal obamacare and replace it was something that actually works for the american people. [cheers and applause] i hope you listened carefully in my debate and in paul ryan posed a debate here the president is pointing out, they are cutting $716 billion from medicare.

under our team, we will honor the promises made to our seniors. and one more thing, the senator has in his budget cutting the military by hundreds of billions -- the president has that, not the senator. in addition, there was the sequester idea, they will cut about a trillion dollars of the military. the secretary of defense said those cuts would be devastating to america. to the military, the national security. i will not make those cuts. i will not cut our military. i will keep its second to none in the world. [cheers and applause] and when it came to jobs, both last night with president biden and in my debate with president obama, they did not have a plan for creating jobs for middle

income americans. they say they care about middle income americans, and believe they do, but they don't want to do. they say we will have another stimulus. how did the last one work out? and then it will hire more government workers. there is nothing wrong with government workers, but that will knock the economy going. and then they have plans to make investments, they say. a friend of mine said that they don't want to pick winners and losers, they just pick losers. and then they want to raise taxes. i don't think anyone believes raising taxes creates more jobs. they just don't understand what it takes to get this economy going, and we have a plan. five key elements. paul spoke about them last night. number 1, we are taking full

advantage of our oil, coal, natural gas, nuclear, renewables. we will take advantage of our energy, and that will protect and grow energy, jobs, and also manufacturing. there are a lot of manufacturing jobs, including in the glass industry, that use a lot of energy. when energy is less expensive, jobs come back. under president obama, we have lost 600,000 manufacturing jobs. we want to bring jobs back to america. that is number one. number 2, we're going to make trade work for us. we will open up more markets for our goods. but if people cheat like china has cheated, we will stop it. number 3, when training programs that help our people have the skills they need to succeed and i want our school to be giving our kids the kind of education they need for the jobs of tomorrow. that means we have to put our kids first and parents first and teachers first. [cheers and applause]

number 4, you will not get business people to risk their life savings to start a small business or big companies to come to america, built a big factory, hire americans if they think we are on the road to greece. if we keep spending more than we taken, that is where we're heading. we will cap federal spending and get us back on track to a balanced budget. [cheers and applause] number 5, number 5 is this -- we are going to champion small business. we're going to help small business people build their businesses. to do that, we will keep their taxes down and get regulations to encourage growth and take that big cloud of obama care of

small business. we're going to help small business in america. [cheers and applause] we do those five things and 12 million jobs grow in america and take home pay starts going up again. do you realize under president obama every year, not just his first year, every year the median income in america keeps going down, down, down. the middle class in america is getting crushed, squeeze, because the income is down. at the same time, gasoline prices are up, food prices are up, health insurance premiums are up. it is tough being middle-class even if you have a job in america. we're going to work to create more jobs and more take-home pay. that is our passion. that is why we are in this race. we need a strong america so we can provide for our families and the future of this great country. [cheers and applause] and i want you to know, i am

confident that we are going to overcome the challenges we have. i have seen the heart of the american people through my life. i know something about the character of those who have great qualities of the human spirit in their heart. we stood up, regardless of the challenges america has faced, we have been there and overcome them. i am reminded of a couple of experiences. one was at the republican convention a few months ago. i met jane horton there. her husband, a sharpshooter in afghanistan. she is packing a birthday box for him in afghanistan and a knock came on the door to inform her that he had been killed in afghanistan. instead of becoming despondent and depressed, she has decided to devote herself to families of those who have lost others in conflict. on the day of her husband's funeral, some of those misguided souls came there to protest the funeral. she was asked, what do you think of these people? she id this, "chris died for them to be able to protest." isn't that an amazing american spirit, amazing woman? [applause]

i love our men and women in uniform. o beautiful, for heroes proved in liberating strife, who more than self their country loved it, and immersing more than life. that will are veterans of the armed services please raise your hand so we can recognize you? thank you. [cheers and applause] thank you. thank you. let me mention another experience i had. that was some years ago. i was working with the boy scouts of america at the time, and it was at a court of honor. for those who don't know what that is, that is where the boys got to get their eagle words or other rewards.

alcoa was set up in the gymnasium. i was seated at the table and there was a fly ball with the flag next to me. the person who was speaking with the boy scout scoutmaster from monument, colorado. he said his boy scout troop wanted to have a very special american flag. they bought one. they have one above the state capitol and had it flown above the national capital in washington, d.c. when it came home, they said let's have it go up on the space shuttle. they contacted nasa and said, would you take our flag on the space shuttle. and i am sure they told them that space comes at a premium. it does not have a lot of room for souvenirs on the space shuttle, but they ticket. they took their flag and he said you cannot imagine how proud our boys were from the school rooms to watch the shuttle takeoff and go in the sky on tv.

then they sought explode before their eyes. and the scoutmaster said he called nasa it couple weeks later and said, did you find any remnant of our flag? and he said, no appeared he said he called every week for several months, he called and called. nothing. then, come september, he was reading a newspaper and it was about some of the debris from the challenger disaster and he read something about a flag. so he called and he said, did you find our flag and they said, as a matter of fact. they presented the boys with a plastic box and they opened it and there was their flag in perfect condition. and then he said this. he said, that is it on the flagpole next to mr. romney at the end of the table. i ticket out and held it out and it was like allegis you ran through my arm. for me, that flight represented the men and women who put

themselves in harm's way, in our space program, in our military. those who reach for learning, who live for something bigger than themselves, who look for discovering, who put themselves out there. it reminds me of the people, when they graduate from college her from high-school who say, you know what? i will put aside my career for well and serve my military, serve the my country. it reminds me of the single moms who are wondering how they can put food on the table at the end of the week and be able to do so, the couples who say we will not exchange christmas gifts among ourselves because we want our kids to have christmas. this is america. this is who we are. we're people who live for big things for her future, for kids, for our nation, for liberty.

president obama wants bigger and bigger government, more and more intrusive in our lives feared that is not what makes america america. it is freedom the drives america. it is free people. we stand on the shoulders of the greatest generation. my mom and dad in your moms and dads, they fought, protected us, give as a nation that is free and prosperous, the most prosperous nation in the world. they held a torch for the whole world to see, the torch of liberty and hope and opportunity. they're not as many of them as there were. and they cannot hold the torch as high as they used to. it is our turn. we have to hold that torch. it is their honor to be able to do so. so i come to you with this commitment.

when paul ryan and i become president and vice president, and i mean when we become president and vice president -- [cheers and applause] we will do everything in our power to keep america strong to restore the values that make home the center. that is the america we face. we make that commitment to you. we need your help. we need ohio. we need to get your friends to help ohio. we keep america. we keep this country the hope of the earth. thank you so very much, you guys. you're the best. thank you! [applause] ♪

♪ ♪

♪

♪

♪

♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪

we ask c-span viewers what they thought of the vice presidential debate. here is what they had to say. >> i thought vice-president biden was very rude. he cut off paul ryan all the time. >> i really went on vice president biden. i see the sincerity in his response. i could feel his love for the people. on the other hand, ryan, first of all, he needs to go to the doctor because he drinks a lot of water. >> i thought they gave paul ryan more time, which opposes why joe biden had to interrupt

small-time. i felt that paul ryan was very scripted. this is the way they have been training him for the past two weeks or for however long i felt that joe biden knew what he was talking about. >> joe biden came across to me as a cranky old man, very unlikable, barry and presidential. -- very unpresidential. he was sneering. he was rude. he was talking over and out of turn. very disruptive, laughing, grimacing, smirking, shaking his head, pointing the finger, using an angry tone of voice, very condescending and using the term "my friend." and he taught more than paul ryan did come almost two minutes more. >> i really enjoyed this debate. it was so much more substantial in the way that it was handled by the moderator.

i am an independent. but i am probably going to vote for the president again. i just don't really liked the way that romney and ryan are so conservative. >> i think that paul ryan's closing statement was superior. >> obama was interrupted more and joe biden was not really allowed as long amount of time as paul ryan was paired i suggest that, when obama comes back again, he takes his own alarm clock so he can prove who is talking more. >> i think it was nauseating the way that mr. biden laughed all the way through. does he not take anything serious? he is in debt and incompetent

as -- is as inept and incompetent as obama. >> i felt that paul ryan held his own. he was very calm and very respectful. who put a burr in joe biden's knickers? joe biden was very sarcastic, very angry and frustrated. >> i think there could have been more clarity on paul ryan is part as far as trying to deliver a little bit more -- taking a little bit more charge in what u.s. try to implement. -- in what he was trying to implement. i mentioned before that the joe biden's son was a little bit more used car salesman approach -- joe biden's side was a little bit more used-car salesman approach. i think that paul ryan could have done a lot better. >> i am kind of frustrated that they did not let gary johnson debate. >> i found that vice-president

joe biden was very clear. he was concise. he was very factual. i just did not feel that credibility with ryan. he seemed like he piggybacked on everything that vice- president joe biden said. >> i just made my decision. i am going democrat. i think joe biden backed up with all the information. i kept waiting for the other side to give it to me and they just did not show it. >> paul ryan got caught trying to do decorum and he can do that there because the moderator allowed him more freestyle answer session. joe biden, he did his job appeared he needed to push, whether what he said was factual or not or whether it was rude or not, joe biden pushed a lot. i saw that straightaway.

paul ryan needed to come back and a beard, but he could have -- come back and not be rude, but he could have said, mr. vice president, you're not correct. or you're interrupting my time. he tried to be polite. >> how do you respond? have you gentlemen respond? i agree with him. >> i think in general, let's talk about these issues. this talk about the programs that in the presidency, a lot goes into it. carrying goes into it. that is not terribly specific. strength doesn't appeared that is not specific.

this is what president has to do. in principle, i will take your point in think we ought to discuss child care or whatever else it is. >> and you two? >> no ifs, ands and buts. i will take the pledge because i know that the american folks want to talk about the issues. i will take the pledge and stand on the issues. just for the record, i don't have any spin doctors. i don't have the speech writers. it probably shows. [laughter] i make those charts you see on television. [laughter] you don't have to wonder if it is me talking. what you see is what you get it if you don't like it, you have two other choices. >> i want to say one thing. the ideas i express are mine could i have worked on these things for 12 years and i am the only person up here who has not been part of washington in any way for the last 20 years.

so i don't the implication to be that somehow everything we say is just cooked up and put in our head by anyone else. i am just as sick as you are by having to wake up and figuring out how to defend myself every day. >> taking questions from undecided voters could watch the first town halls from our right time could sonnet -- senator john mccain and senator obama on 2008. then george w. bush and vice president al gore. then president george h.w. bush, bill clinton and ross perot. next tuesday, watched president obama and mitt romney in their town hall debate. c-span coverage starts at 7:00 p.m. eastern. >> tomorrow, "washington journal," will talk about the latest developments on the attack on the embassy in libya. our guest, rick nelson, is director of homeland security

and counter terrorism. followed by a round-table discussion on the affirmative- action case of fisher versus the university of texas before the supreme court. we are joined by courtney bowie and stuart taylor. later, a look at the recent outbreaks of meningitis and the operations and standards of compound pharmacies. our guest this cynthia riley from the american society of health system pharmacist. "washington journal," live with your calls and tweets and e- mails at 7:00 a.m. on c-span. defense secretary leon panetta talked about the role of the defense department on the critical infrastructure against server security threats. he also urged congress to pass a site -- you bill that was brought in august in the senate. this is about 40 minutes.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> ladies and gentlemen. it is myladies and gentlemen, it is my great pleasure and high honor to introduce one of the most talented, versatile, and experienced leaders in american he served our country by meeting the extraordinary challenges of our time. leon panetta thinks back on his days as a first lieutenant in the u.s. army intelligence. he received a medal.

as a member of congress, he chaired the house legislature committee before moving on to the director of a budget. from there president clinton tapped him to become the white house chief of staff. as director of central intelligence, leon panetta made many critical decisions. he made a very public contribution to the united states of america and to our very own new york city. he oversaw this daring mission that ended the life of one osama bin laden. [applause] thank you, mr. secretary. the persistence, courage, and tenacity required to accomplish this reminds me of a quote -- "let every nation know that whoever wishes us ill will pay any price, bear any burden, oppose any foe to assure the survival and success of our liberties." or as secretary panetta would say, "no one attacks the united states and get away with that."

[applause] so, since july 2011, leon panetta has served as our nation's secretary of defense. ladies and gentlemen, you can see that secretary panetta has dedicated much of his life to public service. he has spent 10 years, directing with his wife for the institute of public policy at the california university. the instill the virtues and values of public service. [applause] one day when he returns to monterey -- secretary panetta, please join

me on the podium. [applause] >> leon panetta can be honored for any number of leadership positions he has held and for a lifetime of services rendered to our country. in his service in congress, he has strength in america with this focus on budget, education, and the environment. and the white house, he served as director of the office of management meant but-management budget. he helped make america stronger. at the central intelligence

agency, he had notable results disrupting and defeating terror networks. as the secretary of defense, he has struck a balance as a forceful advocate for efficiencies while also standing resolute in favor of an adequately funded military. i am pleased to bestow upon him that 2011 award for upstanding american and contributions to the country. secretary panetta. [applause] >> thank you. thank you very much.

thank you so much for this wonderful evening and the chance to enjoy some terrific company and be able to express my deepest gratitude to this organization for all of the great things that it does on behalf of those that serve in our military. my greatest thanks for your kind remarks and leadership. i accept this award not so much for myself, but on behalf of the men and women in uniform who are putting their lives on the line every night, every day, in order to protect this country. [applause]

i want to congratulate the troops from the 82nd. they are the very best. i also want to congratulate frank for receiving this award and a great service that he does in helping to find jobs for those who are returning so that they can be part of their community after serving this country to protect their community. perhaps most importantly, he is italian. it is nice to have another italian honored this evening. [laughter] [applause] i also want to thank a great friend. fran townsend. a tremendous master of ceremonies this evening. the reason i asked her to serve on the board is because she is bright, capable, and dedicated.

she is a straight talker. she knows what she is talking about. she is dedicated to this country. in a room of a lot of ugly and old guys, she is not bad to look at. [laughter] general, thank you for your leadership as well and for your distinguished service to this country. i am honored to be with you this evening. we gather in the middle of a very important national contest. it is one that will continue to play out over the coming weeks in unpredictable ways before a final decision is reached. i want to be clear about where my loyalties lie in this contest. i have always been and will be

for the new york yankees. [cheers and applause] i think the score is 1-1. in all seriousness, i really do appreciate opportunity to come back to this great city. new york is a special place to me. i am the son of italian immigrants. both my parents came through new york. that made this a special place for me. i also have the opportunity to be here and worked as an executive assistant to the mayor of new york city. i also have the opportunity to work closely with the delegation in congress in washington.

i lived with other members of congress in washington. you cannot live with them and not develop an appreciation for new york city. i also served on the board of the new york stock exchange for six years. i was on the board when 9/11 took place. i want you to know how much at that time i appreciated the great courage of the people of new york's in the face of that attack. i remembered that courage when i had a chance to lead the operation in going after bin laden. we sent a clear message to the world and to terrorists. don't ever attack this country.

you will not get away with that. [applause] i have long appreciated from my own experience new york's role at the center of gravity for our nation's economy. this is where it is act. -- this is where it is at. for that reason, it is an honor to be able to speak before this kind of distinguished audience of business leaders and innovators. you understand what a strong, national defense is all about. you understand that a strong defense and strong economy go hand in hand. tonight i like to discuss with you an issue that i think is at the very center of business and

national security. the threats facing the united states in cyberspace and the role that the defense department must play in defending this country from those kind of threats. we are on an aircraft carrier. this great aircraft carrier. this ship and the technology that is on display at this museum attest to one of the central achievement of the united states in late 20th- century. our ability to project power and strength across the land, across the high seas, across the skies, and across our space.

we have secured those domains. securing them to help ensure that they were used to advance peace and prosperity. they were not used to promote war and aggression. it is with that same goal in mind today. we have to addressing a domain that we must secure to have peace and prosperity in the world of tomorrow. cyberspace has transformed our way of life, providing two billion people across the world with instant access to information coming to communication, to economic opportunities.

cyberspace is the new frontier. full possibilities to a dance -- to advance security and prosperity in the 21st century. and yet these possibilities also come with new perils and new dangers. the internet is open. it is highly accessible, as it should be. but that also presents a new terrain for warfare. it is the battlefield of the future, where adversaries can seek to do harm to our country. to our economy. and to our citizens. i know that c'mon people think -- i know that, when people

think of cyber security today, they worry about hackers and criminals who prowl the internet, steal people's identities, steal sensitive business information. steel even national security secrets. those threats are real. and they exist today. but even greater danger, the greater danger facing us in cyberspace goes beyond time and it goes beyond harassment. the cyber attacks perpetrated by nation states or violent extremist groups could be as destructive as a terrorist attack on 911. such a destructive cyber terrorist attack could virtually paralyzed the nation let me give you some examples of the kinds of attacks that we have already experienced.

in recent weeks, as many of you know, some large u.s. financial institutions were hit by so- called disputed denial of service. these attacks delayed or disrupted services on customer websites while this kind of tactic is not new, the scale and speed with which it happened is unprecedented. but even more alarming is an attack that happened two months ago when a very sophisticated virus called shamun infected computers. it included a routine called a wiper, coded to self execute.

this routine replaced crucial system files with the image of a burning u.s. flag. but it also put additional garbage data that overrode all of the real data on the machine. more than 30,000 computers that infected were rendered useless and had to be replaced. it virtually destroyed 30,000 computers. there was a similar tax on ross gas of qztzr, -- of qatar.

all told, it is the most destructive attack that we have seen to date. the major impact that attack would have on your company or your business. these attacks mark a significant escalation of the cyber threat and they have renewed concerns about still more destructive scenarios that could unfold we know that foreign cyber actors are probing america's critical structure networks. they are targeting the conduct

future control -- the computer control systems that control electricity and water plants and those that died transportation throughout this country. we know of specific instance these -- instances where interests have successfully gained access to these control systems. we also know that they're seeking to create advanced tools to attack these systems and caused panic and destruction and even the loss of life. let me explain how this could unfold. an aggressor nation or extremist group could use these kinds of cyber tools to gain control of critical switches. they could, for example, the rail passenger trains or even, -- derail passenger trains or,

even more dangerous, derail trains with loaded dangerous chemicals. -- trains loaded with dangerous chemicals. they could invade the water supply in major cities or shut down the power grid in large parts of the country. the most destructive some areas involve cyber actors launching several attacks on our critical infrastructure at one time in combination with a physical attack on our country. attackers also seek to disable or degrade critical military systems and communication networks. the collector results of these kinds of attacks could be a cyber pearl harbor. but an attack that would cause physical destruction and the loss of life. an attack that would paralyze and shocked the nation. and create a new profound sense

of boehner ability. -- of vulnerability. as director of the cia and now as secretary of defense, i have understood that cyber attacks are every bit as real as the more well-known threats like terrorism, nuclear weapons proliferation and the turmoil which see in the middle east. and the cyber threats facing this country are growing. with a dramatic increase, advances. this is an area of dramatic developments in cyber technology. with that happening, potential aggressors are exploiting the vulnerabilities and -- a vulnerability is in our security. but the good news is this. we are aware of this potential. our eyes are wide open to these kinds of threats.

and we are a nation that, thank god, is on the cutting edge of this new technology. tore the best and we have stay there. the department of defense, in large part to the capabilities of the national security agency, an essay, has developed the --, nastional security agency, nsa, has developed the world's most sophisticated system to detect cyber intruders and attackers. we are acting aggressively to get ahead of this problem, putting in place measures to stop cyber attacks did in their tracks. we are doing this as part of a broad whole of government effort to confront cyber threats. the department of homeland

security as the lead for domestic sever security. the fbi also has a key part to play in investigating and preventing cyber attacks. and our intelligence agencies, of course, are focused on this potential threat as well. the state department is trying to forge international consensus on the roles and spots -- roles and responsibilities of nations to help secure cyberspace. the department of defense also has a rule. -- a role. it is a supporting role, but he is an essential role. bentonite, i want to explain what that means. but first, let me make clear what it does not mean. it does not mean that the department of defense will monitor citizens' personal computers. we're not interested in personal communication or in e-mails or in providing the day-to-day security of private and

commercial networks. that is not our goal. that is not our job. that is not our mission. our mission is to defend the nation. we defend, we deter, and, if called upon, we take decisive action to protect our citizens. in the past, we have done so in operations on land, at sea, in the skies and in space. in this century, the united states military must help the nation in cyberspace as well. if a foreign adversary attacked u.s. soil, the american people have every right to expect their national defense forces to respond. if a crippling cyber attacks were launched against a nation,

the american people must be protected. and if the commander-in-chief orders in response, the defense department must be ready to obey that order and to act. to ensure that we fulfill our world to defend the nation in cyberspace, the department is focusing on three main tracks. one, developing new capabilities. two, putting in place the policies and organizations we need to execute our mission. and 3, building much more effective cooperation with industry and with our international partners. let me briefly talk about each of these. first, developing new capabilities. dod is investing more than $3 billion annually in cyber

security. because we have to retain that cutting edge capability in the field. following a new defense strategy, the department is continuing to increase key investments in cyber security, even in an era of this -- of fiscal restraint. our most important investment is in still cyber warriors. needed to conduct operations in cyberspace, just as dod developed the finest counter- terrorism force over the past decade, we need to build and maintain the finest cyber force in operation. we are recruiting. we are training. we are retaining the best and brightest in order to stay ahead of other nations. it is no secret that russia and china have advanced cyber capabilities.

iran has also undertaken a concerted effort to use cyberspace to its advantage. moreover, dod is already in an intense daily struggle against thousands of cyber actors who probed the defense department's networks millions of times a day. throughout the innovative efforts of our cyber operators, we have been trying to enhance the department's cyber defense program. these systems rely on sensors. they rely on software to hunt down the malicious code before it harms our systems. we actively share our own experience with those running the nation's critical private- sector networks. in addition to defending the

department's networks, which also helped deter attacks. our cyber average tariffs -- cyber adversaries will be less likely to be deterred if we fail against their strong defenses. the department has made significant advances in solving a problem that makes the tearing cyber adversaries more complex. the difficulty of identifying the origins of that attack. over the last two years, dot has made significant investments in for -- dod has made significant investments in this. we have seen return on that investment. potential aggressors should be aware that the united states has the capacity to locate them and to hold them accountable for their actions that may try to harm america.

but we won't succeed in preventing a cyber attacks through improved defenses alone. if we detect an imminent threat of attack that will cause significant physical destruction in the united states or kill american citizens, we need to have the option to take action against those who would attack us, to defend this nation when directed by the president. for these kinds of scenarios, the department has developed the capability to conduct effective operations to counter threats to our national interest in cyberspace. let me be clear that we will only do so to defend our nation this month to defend our interests.

to defend our allies -- to defend our nation, to defend our interests, to defend our allies. and it will be consistent with policy interest and legal framework said the department follows for other domains, including the law of armed conflict. which brings me to the second area of focus. policies and organization. responding to the cyber threat cough requires the right policies and organizations across government. for the last year, the department of defense has been working very closely with other agencies to understand where are the lines of responsibility when it comes to cyber defense. where do we draw those lines? and how those responsibilities to get executed? as part of that effort, the department is now finalizing the most comprehensive change to our rules of engagement in cyberspace in seven years.

the new rules will make clear that the department has the responsibility not only to defend the dod networks, but to also be prepared to defend the nation and our national interests against an attack in or through cyberspace. these new rules make the department more agile and provide us with the ability to confront major threats quickly. to execute these responsibilities, we must have strong organizational structures in place. three years ago, the department took a major step forward by establishing the united states cyber command. under the leadership of general keith alexander, a four-star officer, who also serves as director the national security agency, cyber command has matured into what i believe is a world-class organization.

it has the capacity to conduct a full range of missions in cyberspace and it is also working to develop a common real time understanding of the threats in cyberspace. the threat picture could be quickly shared with dod's geographic and functional combatant commanders with dhs, with fbi, and with other agencies in government. after all, we need to see an attack coming in order to defend against that attack. and we're looking at ways to strengthen cyber command as well. we must ensure that it has the resources, that it has the authority, that has the capabilities required to perform this growing mission. and it must also be able to react quickly to events unfolding in cyberspace and

helpful integrate cyber into all -- and help fully integrate cyber into all of the department's plans and activities. finally, the third area is to build stronger partnerships. as i have made clear, securing a cyberspace is not the sole responsibility of the united states military or even the sole responsibility of the united states government. the private-sector, government, military, our allies all share the same global infrastructure and we all share the responsibility to protect it. therefore, we are deepening cooperation with our closest allies with the goal of sharing capabilities in determining malicious activities.

the president, the vice president, secretary of state and i have made cyber a major topic of discussion in nearly all of our bilateral meetings with foreign counterparts. i recently met with our chinese military counterparts just a few weeks ago. as i mentioned earlier, china is rapidly growing its cyber capabilities. in my visit to beijing, by a underscored the need to increase communication and transparency with each other so that we could avoid a misunderstanding or a miscalculation in cyberspace. this is in the interest of the united states. it is also in the interest of china. ultimately, no one has a greater interest in cyber security than the businesses that depend on a safe, secure, and resilience global digital infrastructure.

particularly those who operate the critical networks that we must help defend. to defend those networks more effectively, we must share information between the government and private-sector about threats in cyberspace. we made real progress in sharing information with the private sector. but very frankly, we need congress to act to ensure that this sharing is timely and comprehensive. companies should be able to share specific threat information with the government. without the prospect of lawsuits hanging over their heads. and a key principle must be to protect the fundamental liberties and privacy in cyberspace that we are all duty bound to uphold. information sharing alone is not sufficient.

we have to work with the business community to develop baseline standards for our most critical private-sector infrastructure. our power plants, our water treatment facilities, our gas pipelines. this would help ensure that companies take proactive measures to secure themselves against sophisticated threats, but also take common-sense steps against basic threats. although awareness is growing, the reality is that too few companies have invested in even basic cyber security. the fact is that the fully -- to fully provide the necessary protection in our democracy, cyber security legislation must be passed by the congress. without it, we are and we will

be vulnerable. congress must act and it must act now on a comprehensive bill such as the bipartisan cyber security act of 2012, co- sponsored by senators lieberman, collins, rockefeller and feinstein. [applause] this legislation has bipartisan support, but it has fallen victims to legislative and political gridlock like so much else in washington. that frankly is acceptable. it is not just an acceptable to me, but to you and to anyone concerned with safeguarding our national security. while we wait for congress to act, the administration is looking to enhance cyber security measures under existing authorities by working with the private sector to promote best practices, increase

information sharing. they are considering issuing an executive order as one option to try to deal with this situation. but very frankly, there is no substitute for comprehensive legislation and we need to move as far as we can in the meantime. we have no choice because the threat that we face, as i have said, is already here. congress has a responsibility to act and the president of united states has a constitutional responsibility to defend our country. i want to urge each of you to add your voice to those who support stronger cyber defenses for our country. in closing, let me say something that i know the people of new york, along with all americans, will appreciate.

before september 11, 2001, the warning signs were there. we were not organized. we were not ready. and we suffered terribly. for that lack of attention. we cannot let that happen again. this is pre-9/11 moment. [applause] the attackers are plotting. our systems will never be impenetrable, just like your physical defenses are not perfect. but more can be done to improve them. we need congress and we need all of you to help in that effort.

i want you to know the department of defense is doing our part. and tonight, i am asking you to do yours as citizens and as business leaders. helpless in of late. help us increase the nation's cyber security -- help us innovate. help us increase the nation's center security. by securing your own networks. help us remain head of the threats that we confront. by doing so, you will help ensure that cyberspace continues to bring prosperity to your company's and to people across the world. bens as played in important part in this debate by identifying the key seven security challenge or the business community and government must work together. i want to thank you for your leadership in this area and thank you again for your

recognition of the efforts that we have made. but more broadly, let me thank you for your commitment to the dream that guides all this in this nation. -- guides all of us in this nation. i talked about my parents as immigrants and i used to ask my father why did he travel all of that distance. to come to a strange land, leaving the comfort of family. it was a poor area in italy, but why would you leave your comfort of family and trouble that this is too strange land? -- and travel all of that distance to a strange land? and my father said that the reason he did it is because he and my mother believed that they could give their children a better life. that is the american dream. that is what we want for our children. we have achieved that dream

because we always have been able to defend our interests and our values. that must remain our most important mission on land, at sea, in the air, in space, and, yes, in cyberspace. this is not just the responsibility. it is a duty that we owe to our children and their children in the future. thank you very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> this government, as promised, has maintained the closest surveillance of the soviet military buildup on the island of cuba. within the past week, unmistakable evidence has established the fact that a

series of offensive missile sites is now in preparation on that imprisoned island. the purpose of these bases can be none other than to provide a nuclear strike capability against the western hemisphere. >> do you deny that the ussr has placed and is placing medium and intermediate raise missile sites in cuba? yes or no? don't wait for the translation. yes or no? >> live sunday from the jfk presidential library and museum. historians, scholars, filmmakers on the 50th anniversary of the cuban missile crisis. >> the thing about eisenhower is that he would never tell anybody whether he was going to use nuclear weapons. why is this important?

because, 1950's, when nuclear weapons were pretty new, and we threatened to use them at various stages, ike did, but nobody ever knew whether he was serious or not, whether he meant it. and of course, to be credible as a deterrent, if you have to be credible and ike never told anybody. i was fascinated by that notion appeared to talk about the loneliness of command. the use of nuclear weapons, what could be a greater command decision than that? here's a guy who ran the allied invasion in world war ii and free europe. now he is president and he has an even greater level of responsibility at a time when nuclear-weapons are new. the soviets are getting them and we have them. not just one hour to, but we're building a whole arsenal. h-bomb's. are we going to use these things are not? and i used them as a tool. he embraced this and usable

weapon as a tool to basically avoid any war. >> evan thomas on ike's bluff sunday on "q&a" @ 8:00 p.m. on c-span. >> republican rep mary bono mac and democratic challenger raul ruiz faced off for california's 36 district. this is about an hour. >> welcome to this special 2012 congressional debate between married by now mack -- by mary bono mack and raul ruiz.

i will be acting as your moderator. on the panel is a political correspondent for "the desert sun." there will be asking tough questions tonight while i try to keep the candidates under control and our debate on time. the rules of the debate are simple. the candidates agree to answer questions and debate one another on issues related to domestic and foreign policy. the candidate and answering the question first will have two minutes to reply. the other candidate will have one minute to respond. candidates are not allowed to address each other with questions directly and there is no audience inside the studio tonight. the candidates are allowed to take notes. each candidate will have three

minutes to make an opening statement. we will wrap things up by providing the candidates with another three minutes each for their closing statements. the candidates from the brand new 36 congressional districts are incumbent republican mary bono mack. she is serving her eighth term in the u.s. house of representatives. the congressman is the chair of the subcommittee on commerce, manufacturing and trade, as well as a member of the energy and commerce committee. her democratic challenger is dr. raul ruiz. he is an er physician. this is his first campaign for public office. he grew up in the coachella valley. welcome to both of you.

earlier, we had a coin toss to determine who we would hear from first. you have three minutes. >> thank you so much. thank you to all the voters. i grew up right here in the desert. the son of farmworkers. my first home was a trailer. my parents cannot afford to send me to college, so i put on my only suit. the one i wore to church, it was itchy and two sizes too big. i went from business to business handing the store owners a contract and asking them to invest in their community by investing in my education. i promise to come back as a doctor. with their help, i went to ucla and then to harvard medical school, where i became the first latino to receive three graduate degrees from harvard. true to my promise, i came home as an e.r. doctor.

i am living proof of the american dream. for too many people, the american dream is in danger because washington is broken. too many workers have lost their jobs. too many retirees have lost their savings. too many students cannot afford college. our congresswoman has lost touch with the people. instead of looking out for us, they're focused on partisan bickering, scoring political points, and looking out for themselves and their wealthy donors. congresswoman's response to our problems is more of the same. more bickering, or partisanship, and more looking out for herself instead of us. instead of listening to people and proposing real solutions, she relies on the same old worn out partisan playbook that does nothing to create jobs or help seniors on fixed incomes. watch tonight how many time she talks and says empty phrases.

-- how many times she tosses around empty phrases. every time you hear them, remind yourself, this is the language of gridlock. congresswoman, you are not running against nancy pelosi and tonight, you are not in washington. you are here in the coachella valley, where people know the name calling and playing politics and do not solve problems. mary bono mack was not always this way, but washington has changed her. she even voted to turn medicare into a voucher program. she voted nine times to raise her own pay. there are a lot more examples. republicans, democrats, independentss, we're not each other's enemies. our enemies are the high unemployment rate, the skyrocketing cost of predict -- prescription drugs, and the high-school dropout rate. i am running for congress because i want to help revive

the american dream for middle- class families and seniors. i look forward to talking about those issues tonight. >> thank you very much. >> tonight i really wanted to talk to all of you about the economy, health care and energy. real issues that affect real people. first, i must tell you what i recently learned about my opponent. information that he is clearly tried to hide and the local press has never investigated. everything i tell you is documented fact and it is awful. when the doctor was a student at harvard, he led protests against the celebration of thanksgiving. no joke. he led protests against thanksgiving day. because he opposes what thanksgiving stands for and would represent spread he even called for smashing plymouth rock, a symbol of america's

freedom. he said "crush this rock and all that represents." what it represents, doctor, is the hopes and dreams of people fleeing from tyranny and seeking freedom. he should also know that abraham lincoln established thanksgiving to unite and heal a divided country during the civil war. the truly disturbing parts was to he was demonstrating with and what he was demonstrating for. during one of his protest, and he read a letter expressing support from a man convicted of viciously slaughtering two fbi agents in south dakota. leonard heltepeltier. he murdered them, the agents were wounded, defenseless and lying on the ground. one agent even lifted his hand to shield himself from the barrel of a gun. he stood over him, pulled the trigger and sent a bullet into his skull.

this despicable crime was the work of a man the doctor not once released from prison. -- the doctor now wants released from prison. during another protest, a different cop killer had a statement read calling this giving an american holocaust. "the greatest single act of terrorism to date or not perpetrated by osama bin laden, but by the u.s. military when it dropped atomic bombs on the people of hiroshima and nagasaki." and other speaker -- you get the idea. these kinds of protests, you knew what they were. he participated and led them six years in a row. charging the police with brutality. he hid his past because he knew it would destroy his political future. the local press has to explain why they refuse to investigate and report on his background.

i urge you to go on-line and looked at these facts for yourself. i am sure you will be as outraged as i am. >> thank you for that. time now to get down to the questions and answers. >> in a recent television ads, and you vowed to voters that you will never vote to cut medicare or social security. not once, not twice, never. many experts have argued the existing programs are fiscally unsustainable. do you think you are being disingenuous to voters when you promise not to support any cuts? how else do you plan to save the two programs? >> congresswoman made some very strong accusations during her opening statement. what i want to say is congresswoman, my mother makes a wonderful thanksgiving turkey and i would love to invite you to our thanksgiving celebration

this year. what is shameful, congresswoman, is that you are calling the anti-american force celebrating -- you are calling me anit-american for celebrating our native american heritage, for giving voice to our native american cultural roots and the first american so that their voice can be a part of our american story. an elder by the name of sam was going to be beaten. i shielded him with my body and i got beaten to and i got arrested. the city dropped all the charges and they paid $100,000 in scholarship funds for native american students. and they erected two plaques commemorating native american heritage.

congresswoman, your father and my two uncles fought in wars so that we can have those freedoms to give voice. you mentioned the leonard, i am not a supporter. i do not support anybody who murders in the fbi agent. if they do, they should be convicted to the fullest extent of a law. she mentions 9/11 attacks and hiroshima bombs, i did not make those comments. people are tired of guilt by association politics. are we to assume that just recently you took an award from an organization that minimizes domestic violence and believes in legitimate rape, where the actual president has said that the women and battered movement has outlived its time? >> i am going to stop you there. you did not answer the question. she wishes to move on with the questions. -- you would like to respond or should we just move on iwth the

wu -- with the questions? >> can we do both? >> dr., can you please answer the question? >> repeat the question. >> you've got to voters that you will never vote to cut medicare or social security. not once, not twice, never. many experts have argued the existing programs are fiscally unsustainable. do you think you are being disingenuous to voters? >> over 50% of my patients in the emergency department use medicare. i know very well how important medicare is to them. medicare is america's promise to our seniors. if you work hard and pay your taxes, when you become a senior, you will be guaranteed medical coverage. the congresswoman has broken that promise, not once, but twice. she wants to turn medicare into of private voucher to pawn care- -- into a private

voucher coupon care-like system that would cause seniors $6,000 out of pocket the year. that is way too much for our seniors today. instead of tackling our health care costs under deficit, she wants to put the burden of those costs on the shoulders of our seniors. i am sure she will talk about obamacare and make the claim -- >> your time is up. >> first of all, you were there. you know exactly what you dead. it is written in multiples -- you knew exactly what you did. it is written in multiple articles. it is still today on the web site. i'm your own web site, the data still exists about your antics. you cannot deny that you walked people to plymouth rock and said crush this and all that stands for. i do believe you owe an

explanation to the american people. i do not quite understand the reporting, the police say you were belligerent. you then said, i was just protecting children from being pepper sprayed. but the story you are saying to day is that you were protecting an elder named sam. who are you really? we do not know who you are. furthermore, 2002, when you were cochairing this event, we had troops in harm's way in afghanistan. he stood there, your organizational culture said, we stand with our brothers in iraq and afghanistan and he did not mean american troops. if you would like to announce that, good for you. but the records shows you how a six-year history of these

protests. medicare, you want to talk about throwing around interesting factoids. he is clearly taking is talking points -- his ads claiming exactly what he just sat on the stage was one of the biggest swappers of the year. -- whoppers of the year. medicare is going broke. one would think that you would recognize that we do have a promise to our seniors, anybody in medicare now, anybody 55 and older would remain in that system of medicare. this is not just about seniors. it is about the totality of our nation. it is about our children and our grandchildren. what you find a acceptable is that everything we do today, it is put on a credit card that future generations will have to pay for. i have the most beautiful grandbaby in the world. i think about my children and my grandchildren.

>> thank you, congresswomen. i would like to remind candidates. we ask the questions, let you guys answer them. he did not address each other. we will give you plenty of time to respond. we will move on to the next topic. >> i believe i have a bottle. -- rebuttal. >> you have 30 seconds. >> there was a full investigation and the charges were dropped. the statement said other people made, i did not make those statements. if you believe i made those statements, other people who make statements on your behalf, believing in the concept of legitimate rape, that is horrible. the way we will protect medicare is by tackling the real problem, which is health care cost. not turning it into a voucher system.

allowing medicare to negotiate it drug prices with pharmaceutical companies. that is also to reduce the redundancy of unnecessary procedures. >> next question. >> congresswoman, in october 2009, the partnership unveiled a blueprint that determined the value need to diversify its economy. what role does the federal government had in creating those jobs? >> thank you, elisabeth. i would like to point out an example of somebody who benefited from the work i did. a bipartisan bill that i signed into law and was signed by president obama. all my bills are bipartisan. if you go to -- ask them about

the bill i pass that improve the consumer product safety commission and the rules and regulations they have to live under. go to any of the growers out here in the desert. ask about the country of origin labeling bill. if the american farmer had the opportunity to get on their produce, grown in the u.s.a., a product of the u.s.a., people would buy their produce. i have had a congressional hearing promoting tourism. i had spotlight come testify before the congress to share his expert -- scott white come testify before the congress. i fight very hard for them, i always have. i have a very strong record of achievement on their behalf. >> congresswoman, i remember

this commercial back in the 1980's were there was a little lady who said, where is the beef? where are the jobs? everything you listed is a failure to deliver on jobs right here at home. in fact, you have voted to give tax breaks to corporations who ship jobs overseas. for subsidies for big oil. you have taxed our job creators. under the right in plan, you -- under the ryan plan, you voted to increase taxes for that middle-class. in order to create jobs right here in our district, we need to decrease taxes on her middle class and small businesses. -- decrease taxes on middle- class and small businesses. i worked with them and helping them develop their pipeline programs for our students in order to get jobs. those same students york -- you voted to cut their pell grants.

>> folks, it is really sad to hear what he is saying. do me a favor, ask them yourself. go to coin motor sports and ask them. look at their fine products. did mary bono mack help save jobs? hear what they have to say. those speak to some of the growers. ask them, did country of origin labeling helped to save jobs? riverside medical center from day one. >> thank you so much. >> an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants are living in the united states. a recent study by uc-berkeley found 67% of californians feel the federal government should offer apac to citizenship. do you agree -- should offer a

path to citizenship. do you agree? if you do, what requirements should be in that pathway? >> i am not for amnesty. i am for and earned path to citizenship. this is a clear example of how congress is broken and how the congressman has has 14 years to lead and she has failed to deliver. she will talk about how important immigration is to this district. our economy depends on it. with our tourism, agriculture, and our construction. this is what we need a comprehensive immigration reform. we need to secure our borders with more agents and more technology. we need to make sure our economic industry that we thrive on with agriculture, construction, it can have the labor pool that they need. we need to create an earned

path to citizenship that respects the laws. one thing i would vote for would be the dream act. risking their lives for our -- country and for us and our freedoms. congresswoman mary bono mack has filled to lead in this example. she has voted against the dream act. >> congressman, you have one minute. >> i stance on immigration is the same as it was two years ago. it is a very logical stance on immigration. i believe we need strong interior enforcement mechanisms and i believe we need a non- amnesty program for people to use to be employed in the united states of america. let me say something about the dream act.

president obama, nancy pelosi, and harry reid have the perfect trifecta. they had the senate and the -- senate and thehe white house, two years to pass comprehensive immigration reform, and they did nothing. they did not have a single bipartisan meeting at the white house. i do not support president obama did what he likes to do, an executive order on the dream act. >> thank you. >> you are not running against nancy pelosi. this is precisely the language of gridlock that is evident as to why we have a do nothing congress. one of the things we have to do is to realize that the congresswoman has failed to lead. she talks a big game, but she has failed to deliver.

her language, when she attacks and attacks is very partisan. >> the next question. >> in your last debate, you refused to disclose your personal fought on california's prop. 8, which bans same-sex marriage. instead, you repeatedly said that this was a state and not a federal issue. now that it is being looked at by the federal court, it has become a federal constitutional issue that has national implications on the legality of same-sex marriages. don't you think residents deserve to know where you stand on the issue? >> thank you for the question. i do need to go back to one thing. it is critically important that people recognize a vote for the doctor is a vote for nancy pelosi.

the very first he would take in congress to be his vote to confirm nancy pelosi as speaker of the house. very important people understand that. back to the question of same- sex marriage. i know you bring this up every time you can. i am -- it is clear where i am with my family. my transgendered stepson, we have a close relationship. it is clear i have a big heart and i do not have a bigoted bone in my body. you try to pigeonhole me and to take in a position on a state issue. it was not a federal issue up for me to decide. look at my history. i have twice voted against constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. that speaks for itself.

my family is the modern family before there was even a modern family. don't ask, don't tell, i voted against the first one. it was a nancy pelosi political vote. i supported the repeal of don't ask, don't tell. has there been a problem with the repeal of don't ask don't tell? i was so happy to hear them say, no, there has been no problem. >> thank you, congresswoman. >> she has gone washington and she thinks she is here with nancy pelosi. one of the things we really need to see, this is another of example of a failed leadership. she dodged the question. she must be really good at dodge ball. there are a thousand people in this district that this is very

important issue for. i believe that marriage equality is the right. i believe in marriage equality because i am against any form of discrimination, whether gender, race, or the person that you love. anybody who loves each other, who wants to be a committed relationship, should have the right to marry. congresswoman, yes or no vote, you have thousands of residents who want to know if you believe in their right to marry. >> you must have me confused with a supreme court justice. i am not that. this decision is in the courts. it will make its way to the supreme court of the united states. i have a very clear record on these things. i have a clear record on

nondiscrimination and the work place. i have a very clear record with these issues. it is so sad that some like you always seeks to divide people rather than unite them. >> congresswoman thank you. >> security concerns in libya made it difficult for the united states to figure out exactly how the ambassador and other americans were killed. both you and your opponent denounced the attacks. but you've kept quiet on whether president obama has been taking the appropriate steps. but you think of the white house response? -- what do you think of the white house response? >> i firmly believe that america is the beacon of democracy and the leaders of the free world. i firmly believe that our priorities should be the security of america and americans around the globe and our friends in israel and all of our allies in the area. once this becomes an issue of

-- once this becomes an issue where we start to focus on the terrorist acts around the world, we start to realize our troops need more than lip service. we need to make sure that we protect america and americans and we honor our troops. she's talked about how she supports our troops, she has decreased millions of dollars of help -- and mental health for them. she has cut the ability for families of soldiers who have died to stay in their homes. she is voted against the veterans bill -- and veterans benefits bill and she has voted against the post-9/11 bill. post-9/11 gi bill. all this at the same time that

she has voted nine times to increase her own pay. i couldn't let you get away with that, congresswoman bono mack. >> thank you. i wish i had a lot more time to talk about this than that. but once again, this is very sad. i do not know who dr. use is, -- who dr. ruiz is, but all of this information about what he stood for, that will be online by the end of the night, if it's not already. please go to it and look it up yourself. let me just say this about libya. let me say how important this is, not just what happened, but how it happened. first of all, ambassador stevens wrote to the secretary of state and others and said i know mr. are al qaeda cells here in libya, and i don't feel safe. those pleas were ignored. why did that happen? this white house and people like dr. ruiz, who are sympathizers and apologists for the greatness of america still believe that -- they believe that actually, if we apologize

to our opponents, if we're just nice to them, they'll be nice to us in return. because of this our country is less safe, it is a much more dangerous place today than it was four years ago. >> thank you, congresswoman. dr. ruiz, you have 30 seconds to rebut. >> congresswoman continues to speak the language of gridlock. this is clear evidence why congress is broken. now, over and over she will repeat this incident in the city of plymouth, and it's a shame, it is a shame, it is a shame that you are trying to make me seem like i'm anti- american. >> six years, six years, six years. >> the beauty of america, for which my father and your uncles went to war for were to protect our ability to give voice to our american heritage to, give them a voice in our american story, congresswoman. >> all right, thank you, dr. ruiz. next question. >> congresswoman, this is for you -- two years ago you told the "desert sun" that it was in

our best interest that the united states remain in both iraq and afghanistan. last months you told the veterans that if president obama couldn't outline a clear and concise explanation of why troops remain in afghanistan, then the u.s. should "get the hell out." what prompted such a change in perspective, and if the u.s. pulled out immediately, how do you address concern that the enemy will fill the void? >> let me go back to a little bit more thorough reporting than that. and the article is there. but what i did say is as long as president obama cannot articulate to the american people why we are there and what we are doing, but allowing our troops to flounder because he feels comfortable because he has given a timeline for withdrawal, that troubles me greatly. under this presidential leadership, yes, i am concerned about our troops being deployed in afghanistan, absolutely. but you know what else troubles me about this timeline of president obama's, which is an arbitrary political timeline?

he didn't get that from the generals, he got it from his political advisors. let me tell you what troubles me the most. you know, i think women are more concerned about security than anything else right now. nobody -- and i have to tell you last night i was a little dismayed, after joe biden was busy defending iran and even paul ryan's answer on this was a little bit incomplete for me, too. nobody has said to the american people what i need to know when we pull out our troops from afghanistan, are we safer off as a nation than when our troops were there? will al qaeda once again have the ability to take root in afghanistan and once again launch a terrorist attack against us? he needs to answer that question. he doesn't care. all president obama wants to do is have a political timeline because it makes him feel good. >> all right, congresswoman, thank you. dr. ruiz, you have one minute to replay. >> she once again speaks a big game, but has failed to really lead in this manner. one is you voted to get us into

iraq and president obama got us out and also, he killed osama bin laden. and al qaeda right now is the weakest it's ever been. but we cannot -- we cannot let our guard down. we have to go after the terrorists and make sure they never strike again. and we have to ensure that there are no growing cells anywhere in the world and make sure that we have our resources there. now, she talks about our veterans and our soldiers. we need to bring home our troops from afghanistan, but more importantly, we need to respect our troops that are in combat and harm's way. you voted to freeze their combat pay. you said no to an increase in pay for our soldiers who risk their lives for us, yet you voted nine times to increase your pay. >> thank you, dr. ruiz. congresswoman, you have 30 seconds. >> we all know not all bills that come out of congress are good. our overall record is absolutely supporting our troops and an increase in pay,

absolutely. but what startles me and frightens me about you, too, dr. ruiz, is this -- we are not safer today because osama bin laden is dead. you and your sympathizers would like to say that we are, but libya is proof that we are not. president obama, yes, would like to tell the american people everything's cool now. that is why they lied about the cover-up in libya. that is why they denied the fact that it was a terrorist attack in the beginning. that is why they blamed america and american film, stupid film, i would add, but that is why they blamed a film. they blamed america before they blamed the terrorists. >> thank you so much. now, elizabeth. >> another question for you, dr. ruiz -- in 1998, the first year the congresswoman was elected, then house speaker, newt gingrich, pledged to save the salton sea. yet they admitted that lawmakers have not made enough progress. we have not heard you address the issue on the campaign trail, what would it take to move the issue beyond just rhetoric and empty promises?

is there a point where the federal government seizes control of the project? dr. ruiz? >> thank you for bringing this up, because it really brings very pleasant memories of my father taking me there to fish and having picnics with the family. now we're seeing dead fish and a stink that is unbearable. and this is somewhere where congresswoman has failed to deliver. she continues to talk a big game. she promised in her first election that she would fix the sea. 14 years later it has not been fixed. i don't know what stinks more, a broken promise or the salton sea. in fact, this is a great opportunity right now for us to revive that salton sea so that we can have it as a hot spot for tourism, so that other children can fish with their fathers, so we can develop geothermal energy and boost our economy. and the way we're going to go about doing it is

public/private partnerships with local input and authority so that we can come together and stop this bickering and attack talk and all this other stuff that congresswoman bono mack is so adept at and skilled, but really come up with some problem-solving solutions. and that's what's missing in congress, and that's what's missing in congresswoman bono mack. >> all right, thank you, dr. ruiz. congresswoman, you have one minute. >> thank you. first of all, let me go to this constant bickering that i'm hearing about bickering. you have done nothing, dr. ruiz, at all to take responsibility. you haven't even had a plan for the sea until now that it's been asked of you. clearly you don't understand the complexities of the sea. i would love to know what your thoughts are on the quantification settlement agreement. how do we take control from the state of california? this is what it's all about, dr. ruiz. i and others, including partners like senator feinstein, senator denise due chaney have also been working very hard on the

salt and sea. time is of the essence. right now is an opportunity to finally get the support of neighboring communities, all the way to the city of los angeles. i've called for two congressional hearings as soon as possible into the matter of the salt and sea. but dr. ruiz, this thing you're bickering about bickering is getting old. i'd like to point to people -- >> time, congresswoman. >> thank you. >> dr. ruiz, you have 30 seconds. >> yes. this is another example of a failed promise and failure to lead. she's had 14 years and we see she is still talking about the same thing. nothing has happened. nothing has got done. the other thing is -- and i think one of the reasons is because you're so out of touch, you're so out of sight. you're harder to find than waldo unless people pay to see you. it's very difficult. so we have to make sure that we have true leadership and bring people together in a forum, you know, so that we can start

solving this problem. >> all right, thank you so much. we're continuing along now. erica with the next question. >> congresswoman, the tenor much the campaign has certainly changed in recent weeks. dr. ruiz's campaign has painted you as an out-of-touch beaurocrat who shows disdain for the district by joking with the radio host who describes a district as a third-world toilet. you've described dr. ruiz as further to the left than nancy pelosi, and recently uncovered that ruiz was arrested while protesting in college. do you think he's been unfair and how do you respond to the attacks on your own character? >> thank you, erica, great question. as i said in my popping -- my opening statement i thought we'd go into this debate debating the issues. but clearly dr. ruiz's character is definitely worth looking at. i'm very, very frightened by

what i've seen. he said it was an incident a few moments ago, that he had an incident. he had six years where he led protests, demanding that people crush plymouth rock and all that it stood for. by the way, i'm wondering, even to the press i'll ask the question -- he said it was police brutality, it was their fault. they were the bad guys, they were the aggressors. but then he signed -- and we have the signed statement from dr. ruiz that retracted that, that there was no police brutality. i don't who he is. this to me is critically important. let me explain why this matters. other than the fact that yes, he said crush plymouth rock and all that it stands for and led these protests. questions come up when you're a member of congress that are critically important, questions like this -- do you support reading a terrorist his miranda rights? that's one. another one -- do you support trying a terrorist in the city of new york? that's two. these are very important questions. the character that dr. ruiz has exemplified during his six years at harvard medical school are very troubling.

it's absolutely important that the people of this district know who he is. >> all right, doctor, one minute. >> you know, she says she wants to talk about the issue and her opening statement was pretty much a complete accusation and she's sticking to the accusation, which is completely false. congresswoman, read the investigation, ok? i got arrested for protecting a native-american elder. now, the other thing is that all the charges were dropped. the city paid $100,000 for native american scholarship funds. they erected two plaques in connection with their heritage. -- in commemoration of native american heritage. you bring up something in the past to cover up your disdain of the present. you laugh at the poverty of people in your district and called it a third-world toilet. you showed disdain to our seniors, our middle class and students, and now native-

americans. i'm appalled. you want to charge our seniors $6,000 a year for a private voucher coupon care for their medicare. and now you're running away from that. you're also taxing the middle class under the ryan plan. that is disdain today. >> all right, dr. ruiz. so do you want a 30-second rebuttal of the campaign? >> of course, i do. this is critically important. was there police brutality or was there not? was it an elder or a child? these things, folks, are in the press. they are in "the boston herald," they are in the harvard newspaper. they are documented. they are written. they're spelled out for people to see. it is critically important that people know that who he's saying he is right now is not who he is. further, what i said in that email message was that the city councilman should have been held accountable for allowing durhamville to be the third- world condition that it was and that it continues to be.

have your party release the entire interview. release the interview that exonerates me. >> we're down to the last couple of questions. elizabeth, you have the floor. >> dr. ruiz, in 2010 a bipartisan federal commission unveiled the plan to cut the nation's deficit by $4 trillion through a mix of tax increases and spending cuts. the plan was never voted on in congress. do you agree with any or all with what the commission came up with? what other efforts do you think the country needs to take on to cut the country's debt, which now exceeds $16 trillion? >> debt and our deficit are very important issues that we need to tackle and they're a matter of national security. and this is one of the starkest contrasts between congresswoman bono mack and myself. you see, congresswoman bono mack wants to put the deficit and the burden of our debt on the shoulders of our seniors, our middle class and our students. by turning medicare into a private voucher system and

charging our seniors $6,000 a year for their health care costs on average, by cutting pell grants and stafford loans who rely on those for their college education and she's voted to increase taxes on the middle class through the ryan plan. all of this in order to keep tax breaks for multi- millionaires and tax breaks and subsidies for corporations who ship jobs overseas. we're going to reduce the deficits by bringing home our troops from afghanistan, by making sure that we create jobs right here in the district, by making sure that we decrease taxes on the middle class and small businesses, and by allowing medicare to negotiate drug prices with our pharmaceutical companies so that we can tackle the real problem, which is our health care costs and eliminate unnecessary procedures and redundant tests. >> all right, thank you, dr. ruiz. congresswoman, you have one minute. >> i don't think he understood the question, because what he

just said, he's going to reduce the debt by not having so many medical tests, which, by the way, is a major part of obama care. obama care is what cut medicare by $716 billion on. let me tell you a few specific things i would do immediately to cut the debt. first of all, i would repeal obama care as quickly as possible. secondly, i would defund the high-speed rail in central california, which nobody wants, nobody thinks we can afford, nobody wants to pay for it. i would look for agencies like the n.e.a. and p.d.s. and, yes, it's time for you to make it on your own. not only that, i would do everything we could again. get that debt down. lower those interest rates. lower the interest that we're paying every single day. everybody pays that, the middle class, every single person, senior, young and old. i'm tired out of hearing dr. ruiz it's always one group of people against another. you know, we can save medicare, dr. ruiz. i know we can save it. we can save it for this generation, we can save it if

you're 55 and over. but you know what else, dr. ruiz? we can save it for our generation and our children's generation and our grandchildren's as well, but not by ignoring the problem. >> thank you, congresswoman. dr. ruiz, you have 30 seconds to respond. >> congresswoman bono mack thinks the idea of saving medicare is to charge our seniors and she's made this statement about obama care cutting $716 billion in medicare benefits. that's simply not true. there were cost savings. in fact, congresswoman bono mack voted for those exact same savings under the ryan plan. and in the words of president clinton, it takes some nerve to attack something that you voted for yourself. now what we need to do -- and this is a clear example. she wants to balance the deficit on the shoulders of our seniors, middle class and our students, while protecting tax breaks for multimillionaires and corporations that ship jobs overseas. >> dr. ruiz, thank you so much. we go to the last question of the night.

erica, you have the honors. >> congresswoman, critics have described bolt of you as politicians who will simply vote in lock-step with your political party leadership. can you name some policies that president obama has implemented that you support? and dr. ruiz, when it's your turn, can you name policy points where you disagree with president obama? >> thank you, erica, sure. i support the bills that i passed out of the house and got passed out of the senate and made it to the president's desk and signed into lot. -- into law. the safety improvement act is one. i support other bills that he has passed that he has supported. it's a lot easier for me to say what i don't support. we haven't talked about energy. i need to get energy because it's so critically important, so i am going to pivot. president obama wants to kill the keystone pipeline. how far in the world is he going to increase our energy supply by killing the keystone excel pipeline? yes, i disagrees with him on that.

let me tell you something else. president obama does not meet with the congress. he doesn't even meet with republicans. he doesn't talk to republicans. when they pass obama care, they did it without any republican votes. they actually made a point, when i said to my colleagues i would love to work with you, because a lot of the parts of health care improvement i believe in. you know what was said to me by one of my colleagues? are you kidding? if nancy pelosi knew i talked to you, she would kill me. that is what we're up against. let me tell you do i support a lot of obama's initiatives? no. if i were to cast my vote tomorrow, my absentee ballot would be for romney. >> thank you very much. dr. ruiz, you have a minute, and you can talk about either things you would support or things that you would not support. >> this is a very important question, and i really want the people who have been viewing this debate tonight to really see that she has clearly demonstrated why congress is broken. imagine working in a cmittee

with this type of language and language of gridlocks and attacks. now, i do not believe that we should eliminate the bush tax cuts for those that make over $250,000 a year. we should eliminate those only for those making $1 million or more. i also don't agree with president obama increasing the premiums for our veterans and their tricare insurance. you see, this is something that's very important. congresswoman bono mack has gone washington. she speaks her party line like no other. and i am not running for the democratic party, i am not running for nancy pelosi or president obama, i'm running for you right here in this district as a public servant. i will always run for you. and she continues to ask, who am i? i was humbly given the person of the year by "the desert" magazine. i was given the humanitarian of the year by the rancho mirage

chamber of commerce. i've always been a public servant and stood up hard for the residents of this district and i will do so for our seniors, our middle class and our students right here. >> thank you, dr. ruiz. congresswoman, you have one minute for this rebuttal. >> oh, thank you. i actually don't know quite what to say to that rebuttal, because i have no idea what he stands for. he's saying something here again today, but folks, please go online and research it for yourself. it really is appalling that all of the research and the data about who you were -- you know, again, let me remind people -- 2002, dr. ruiz, you led a protest while we had our troops in afghanistan. 2002 your cohorts said we stand with the people of afghanistan and palestine. is that worth smiling about, dr. ruiz? i don't think it's worth smiling about. but i think that's very, very, very serious. people need to know that. you know, it is important to recognize your very first vote,

unless you want to say otherwise, and i'll gladly defer the time to you, that your very first vote would be for nancy pelosi for speaker. is that true? or is it not true? >> dr. ruiz, would you like to respond? >> she asks a question i would like to bring up, the issue of, once again, she knows how to attack, but she doesn't know how to create solutions. >> can you answer the question, though? >> no. what i want to talk about is she made a very important issue about non-discrimination in the workplace, that she has protected that. in fact, you voted for the lilly ledbetter, act which would ensure equal pay for women and you voted against that. so i can't let you get away with all these false claims that you're making. >> doctor, i know you've never been in business, you don't understand what it's like. women get paid. there are equal-pay laws. i'm rebutting, if i might. >> every physician -- >> dr. ruiz, let her finish. congresswoman, please. >> the people are concerned

about security, they're concerned about national security. they're concerned about domestic security. they want to know they can pay their bills. the lilly ledbetter pay act was strictly out of nancy pelosi. you didn't answer the question if you would vote for nancy pelosi or not. we know the answer. >> we could go on for hours clearly, but unfortunately the hour is quickly coming to a close many time now for the last words from our candidates. dr. ruiz, you're up first. >> thanks again to "the desert sun" for hosting this debate and a special thanks to those of you who devoted time to watching it. engaged and informed voters are so essential to a successful democracy. as candidates we owe it to you to tell you who we are and where we differ. the freedom to disagree and speak our mind is the most american of traditions and values. but there is a big difference between disagreeing and character assassination. congresswoman, i disagree with

your views and priorities, but i don't question your patriotism. i think it's a shame that you question mine. that's at the heart of what's wrong with washington. how do you expect to solve america's problems if you don't even believe in the right of your opponents to express their views without calling them un- american? the congresswoman and i do have very different views, and we heard a lot of them tonight at their core. the differences are about who we stand up for. the congresswoman stands up for billionaires and companies that ship jobs overseas at the expense of the middle class and retirees. we've all heard a lot about job creators tonight, and congresswoman bono mack likes to use ha phrase in previous talks as a debating weapon and in her speeches as if anyone were actually against creating jobs. we're all for job creation. the problem is that congresswoman bono mack has lost touch with who the real

job creators are. i think our teachers who give our kids the skills they need to go to college and get a job, i think they are job creators. but congresswoman bono mack voted to cut education by $115 billion. i think a middle-class family that can afford to buy a house is a job creator, especially in our area where construction is such an important part of the economy. but the ryan budget that congresswoman bono mack voted for would have increased taxes on the middle class by $1,400 a year. i think a company that hires american workers is a job creator, but congresswoman bono mack voted to give tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas. and to add insult to injury, she spent over $80,000 of taxpayer money on her own luxury car and voted nine times to raise her own pay. washington has changed mary bono mack and she's lost touch with the people she's supposed to represent -- the seniors who

count on medicare and social security, the families that work hard every day to build a better life for their children, the homeowners trying to make the next mortgage payment. those are the people i want to give voice to. i would be honored to have your votes. god bless you and god bless america. >> all right, thank you, dr. ruiz. congresswoman, you have the last word tonight. >> thank you. i'd like to thank "the desert sun" for hosting tonight's debate and thank all of you who are watching at home tonight. i want to thank you for the support you've given me and the tremendous honor of being your congresswoman. we all know that today america faces tough challenges. the world is dangerous and unstable. economies are failing. america's unemployment rate is too high, and our quality of life is shrinking. we can and we must do better. i believe in america. i believe in our people and i believe in our future. we faced difficulty times before and we've always come

through better and more united, and we will again. there are so many stark differences between my opponent and me. the most fundamental difference is how we view the role of government. i believe free markets and the free people go hand-in-hand. government should be a guardian of our freedoms and our liberties, because individual freedoms must be protected. my opponent not only believes in a bigger government, he has campaigned donors who illustrate just how far to the left he is willing to go. nancy pelosi has poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into his campaign. he has received financial support from sean penn, a man who's close to the venezuelan dictator, who is no friend of america. dr. ruiz received support from an infamous billionaire family who has poured millions into radical left wing causes throughout the world. dr. ruiz represents one the most far-left candidates to ever seek a congressional office. his history and his involvement with radical groups are shocking.

but i want your support and your vote not because of everything that is wrong with dr. ruiz, but because you and i share a belief about what is right with america. we know that by controlling government spending, reducing taxes and eliminating the overreach of government we will unleash the spirit and the power of american small businesses and entrepreneurs. freedom, free markets and a free people will always prevail. i ask you tonight for your vote so together we will continue to build and fight for a better america. that is my commitment to you. thank you, god bless you, and may god continue to bless the united states of america. >> all right, thank you, congresswoman.

ws77swwwww777w7w

i would still be in session with the senate until we got that farm bill passed. let's talk about the ryan budget for a second, it's important we talk about it. he talked about how he opposed it, he took the ryan budget numbers and that's what he budgeted off of. that is what he did in his subcommittee. let's be honest with the people of state of montana. let us be accountable to them. let us talk about the decisions you have been making. you have not been responsible. >> representative rehberg, 30 seconds. >> anybody with the room believe i do not want to see a farm bill? you agree with it and i agree with it. if you did travel around the 56 counties and you did listen to those having livestock disaster assistance, we passed a disaster assistance livestock bill to the

house of representatives that you couldn't get it through. you held it hostage for your five year farm bill. i want a farm bill as well. we agree on that. if you were listening to the people of montana, you know they wanted livestock mitigation. we could have done it. it passed the house of representatives. you didn't have the leadership ability to get that bill through. you played politics by holding it hostage. >> don't i get a 30 second rebuttal? >> that was his 30. >> well. [laughter] >> sorry, rules are rules. now it's time for each candidate to ask questions of the other candidate. representative rehberg what is your question for senator tester. >> i will ask the question, you support president obama 95% of the time. that is the major issues. that is not necessarily standing with the people of montana. if you listen to the people of montana, they did not want obamacare. they did not see how the stimulus will work. they did not think the epa bureaucrats in washington

should shut down the plant. do you think president obama should be reelected? >> the point is congressman, you're running against me. this is the race. you're not running against president obama. you could have done that, but you chose not to. there's plenty of differences between myself and barack obama. tonight i'm trying to starting to figure out there's similarities between the congressman and barack obama. the fact is, if you go down the list, whether it is trade agreements, whether it is making sure the bailouts do not happen -- we have set the standard and we've set the standard by listening to montana and doing what montana think is correct first. that's the bottom line. he can try to morph me into barack obama because that's what he wants to run against. look at the record, whether it's for veteran and infrastructure

and transparency, the list goes on. these aren't bills i just voted for, these are bills i sponsored and carried and i do want to talk about that farm bill for a second. that drought assistance you talked about, previously you say you got get that pass through the senate, the drought assistance that he wanted cost taxpayers money. the farm bill save money. >> thank you senator tester. mr. rehberg, one minute. >> i don't need to morph you into barack obama, you did it all by yourself. you listened to what he wanted and you voted for a failed stimulus and voted for cap and trade which is nothing more than energy tax. it is going to raise the cost of our utilities. it's going to cost us jobs and oil gas and coal country of eastern montana. you supported the epa and their regulation that they're going to shut down the corette plant. that is going to cost 35 jobs. it is going to cost $10 million annually to the city of killings. it is going to increase your utility costs as much as 25%. it will mothball plants around

the nation. that's not being independent voice. i've tried to be an independent voice for montana by bucking my own party when necessary and supporting my party when necessary. but ultimately traveled to the 56 counties to find out what the people of montana wanted me to do. that's why i voted against the president's healthcare reform because it's not a reformed healthcare. it is necessary we must reform healthcare, if you leave defense of medicine out of it, you haven't done a thing. ask the people of montana, they were told insurance premiums will go down $2500, they went up. it cost every member in montana $5000 for your experiment supporting the president. >> senator tester you have 30 seconds. >> i will say this, any time jobs are lost, that's a bad deal. regs talking about epa been on the books for 20 years. with a talking about a company that made $1.60 billion in

profits last year. the fact, they should invest in that plant. the problem is, congressman, you bring up stuff and hope it sticks. i did not vote for cap and trade. i voted for procedural motion to talk about energy policy in this country. we need to have a debate about that energy policy. we need to have a debate on cap and trade too. to make sure it work or not work for this country. there's plenty of things we need to debate for him to stand up here and list off a litany of things and pull them out of air, i guess it's a baloney. >> it is your turn to ask a question. >> thank you steve, congressman you've taken 15 trips in your tenure in congress. taxpayer-paid trips. trips to australia and south america and europe and south pacific. you've eaten in castles and on

boats and meal boats and gin bars and dealt with lobbyist. i'm sure the lobbyist and special interest got their money from taxpayer trips. what exactly do taxpayers of montana get? >> every trip i've taken has been the benefit of montana. i traveled to australia to find out why it was best of interest for me to vote for the australian free trade. and why they could make the endangered species act worked and we could not. why it was necessary to have the vote that i did. i learned about south korean trade. why did i travel to places like europe? i was honored in a bipartisan fashion for leading democrats in the house to give a keynote speak at normandy to honor our world war ii veterans. it was at the presentation of a new memorial. you want to talk about lobbyist, you're the number one recipient of money for lobbyist. i look out at this room. everybody out here is

represented by somebody in washington d.c. i accept their information, you accept their cash, $1.8 million in the last two years from lobbyist and wall street. i learn from people and listen to people, i don't take their cash while attacking them on other end. >> it's interesting for a guy who hit $25,000 in lobbyist money and he should have reported it and did not transparent about it. for a guy who has taken off tens of millions of dollars of money ad hoc. who's bought commercials for the last year in a half trying to define something i'm not. it's rich that you point this out. look, you are the one that was a paid lobbyist. you were the one that told lobbyist that you depend on them to make your decisions. you the guy who said the revolving door isn't a big deal. it is a big deal. it is tough when you point a finger at somebody and three are pointing straight back at you. >> representative rehberg, you

have 30 seconds to close. >> everybody in this room is represented by somebody in washington d.c. that provides information. i'm not so arrogant to believe that i know everything. i don't have to travel all 56 counties and learn about nuclear and wait refinement. i went to france and traveled across france. i am on the committee that has something to do with that. i traveled around america. i went to georgia and alabama to learn about coal fire generated plants from their perspective. i learned about coal-to-liquid plants. i done everything i potentially can to educate myself but also

to listen to people around america and around the world to ultimately make better decisions rather than going back to my farm every weekend. >> thank you congressman. question from mike dennisson to senator tester. >> senator tester, we've heard a lot tonight about what people are against. i want to talk about what you are. talking about the fiscal cliff. we have deep spending cuts and tax increases, what is your approach -- why is your approach better for the economy and why is your approach better than your opponents approach? >> i don't know your opponent's approach. you are going to ask a question to him in a second. the approach has got to be bipartisan. tove got to work together solve this problem. we're talking about problem in the debt and deficit.

the fiscal cliff comes at the first of the year. there is no doubt that if we don't work together, we are dead in the water. mike, there have been plenty of proposals out there that make sense for this country. big broad based proposals. talked about many of them. they're the simpson-bowls and the list goes on. all sorts of gangs. the bottom line is those templates can be put together. it has to have everything in it, everything has to be addressed. people need to work together. i think there's critical minds in senate to get it done. when we talk about sequestration and the fiscal year, that was imposed on us a bipartisan way to get it done. we have to work together. it is easily fixed. like i said in the beginning, it's what montana do naturally. in washington d.c., we need to learn from montana. >> thank you representative rehberg, one minute. >> first thing we need to do is repeal obamacare. that will be the first action that we need to work on a bipartisan solution to the farm bill. what we really need to do as i travel around montana, the number one word i hear more than anything else, we need certainty. we need to know what our taxes will be. i done everything i possibly can to eliminate the death tax. that is because of my own family situation, where we lived through the death tax and lost 1/3 of our farm.

we have had to rebuild of on borrowed money. we need tax certainty, we don't need regulations continually dropping down. sequestration, i voted against subcommittee, to have 12 people go behind closed doors to solve fiscal crisis in america. that is ridiculous. we tried that with 45 of us. it wasn't going to work in the first place. sequestration is happening because senator tester supported sequestration and it will create a crisis at the end of the year. this is solvable. we can do it. you know what's interesting? not only do they take $716 billion out of medicare, another 2% will be taken out of america. america cannot withstand that kind of reduction to medicare. it is going to destroy the system. sequestration can't happen. >> senator tester 30 second. >> i am probably responsible for the drought in the southwest

as well. >> here's the deal congressman. you voted against sequestration and you voted two years in the budget. you vote for this country to default on our debt. just about every economist in this country said that would have sent us into a depression immediately. that was a year ago last august. the bottom line is, we don't start working together in washington d.c., we're going to continue to have single digit approval ratings. i would be right there voting with everybody else in the single digit. we have a good people back there that have worked together on other issue that's are critically important. cooler heads will come together and we'll get that problem solved. it will be solved in a way to works for the country short term and long term. >> congressman, what's the biggest lie that's been told about you in this election cycle? what will you say to set the record straight? >> i haven't really thought about the biggest lie. what i really think i want to be portrayed as somebody who cares deeply about montana. i'm not sure that comes through in the advertisement against me.

i listen and travel around the counties. i have tried to be an independent voice. what i would have done, i would have tried to extend the payroll tax on employers and employees. every small business could have benefited from that. that includes the newspapers, radio stations, and tv stations making all the money from the ads against us. i wanted tax certainty. i deeply care about the future not just of our children but i look at my mom and dad who are in their golden years because the investments are not coming back because of the recession and we're not turning this economy around as much as possible, i care deeply about trying to change the direction that we're talking about these two avenues. the avenues of my senator opponent has taken and myself who believes there's a different path and better path one that will create a better opportunity for not just my children and grandchildren but my parents as well.

>> i definitely want to keep coming back to recovery act. there was $500 million for tax relief for working families. what creates economy? demand. that $500 million went to working family pockets. there's plenty of lies said about me from the beginning to end. for the last 18 months, we had continual immersion in them. the most interesting one was the one that gave me five fingers on my left hand. i thought i was going to get them and be able to play basketball again. the wide receiver. last week, they sent out a flier that had my face on the picture on the body of rick santorum. it didn't take long to figure that out. the bottom line is this, i pride myself in taking montana back to washington d.c. and working with people.

i don't care if they're democrats or republican or independents. it's too bad we didn't have a libertarian on the stage tonight. i don't care if it's libertarian either. the bottom line is people work together. they have tried to make me something i am not in many areas. you get things done when you work across party lines. things get done in the middle, not on the fringes. >> representative rehberg, you have 30 seconds. >> if you want to talk about false advertising. they put my head on a silver platter in one ad. one ad shows me as the grim raper. everybody is playing that game. it is not unique to he, and those attacking him. what i find interesting when we talk about bipartisan, they talked about leadership and getting things done, what about the fact the senate hasn't passed a budget. frankly, that is illegal, but that does not seem to matter. let's see a bill.

let's see a budget. let's roll up your sleeves across the table and do it in a transparent way. you know what's interesting to me? over the course of 2009 when they had single party rule, they passed obamacare, they passed stimulus and they passed additional $1 trillion in spending. that is $3 trillion in new spending. and the appropriation committee never met once. we didn't have a single hearing. that means no public input, that means no opportunities for amendment. that did not give us the opportunity for you to have your say. that's not transparency. that's what we got with single party rule. we haven't had a budget out of the senate in over three years. >> we have. you voted against it. >> now, we have a question from jackie to senator tester. >> senator, congress designated a number of tax deductions. people call this loopholes, things like market interest or charitable contribution. it allows contributions to 4 01 k's to be a pre-tax. lawmakers often talk about closing loopholes but it often means standing up to special interest and this includes the middle class.

do you favor closing loophole and if so, specifically which one? >> that's a great question jackie. i will tell you if you take a look at the simpson-bowls proposal brought out, it talked about income tax specifically about income tax brings in $1 trillion. there is about $300 billion put out. look, we can reduce some of those tax earmarks and get down to a point where quite frankly we can lower the rate and actually bring in more revenue and make it more simple. i think that is one of the challenges with the debt and the deficit. it is an opportunity there too. i think the housing deduction is important. it's critically important economic driver.

i know there are things in that bill. there are tax earmarks that have been on the books to the big oil companies. i'm talking about the drilling cost. i'm not talking about tax breaks been in the books since 1913 for the exxons of the world. those could be taken off. they are doing fine. on the other side of the coin, the folks out there and doing the wildcatting, the folks out there making difference, let's look at those. let's take a look at what drive our economy and what's not necessary anymore. if you take a look at -- my time is up. >> representative rehberg, you have one minute. >> unlike my opponent, i do not support simpson-bowles. how many times have you heard, "if you would just let us raise taxes, which would cut spending"? what the simpson-bowles does -- it increases gas tax by 15%. it eliminates the home mortgage deduction. it was a promises made when you took out a mortgage and the

value of your home maybe in relation what you pay in your tax. i believe in flat tax. i think ultimately we could move toward the flat tax. we need a simpler system. we need a tax system that is easily done and easily understood and i will begin by helping those senior citizens with their income taxes for the purposes of making simpler for them. i got to tell you, people support reform, as long as it doesn't change anything. it will be difficult to work towards tax reform. i'm fighting for a flat tax. that is the best way to go. >> senator tester. >> the question becomes housing deductions and charitable deductions study maintain when you have the flat tax. but that is not the point. i will say something that we agree on. if we play politics with this, we will never get anywhere. we have to work together on this to reform our tax structure in this country.

if we put good heads together, we can get rid of the deductions that make no sense whatsoever, and they do not drive our economy. it would help us pay down our national debt. >> thank you, now a question from mike dennisson to representative rehberg. >> let's keep talking about taxes. you mentioned the federal and state taxes or you call the death tax and your wish to repeal it. the current tax does not apply to any inheritance income less than $10 million. also family farmer ranch can avoid this tax. the amount in federal debt, why is it a priority for you to cut the income taxes for the few folks inheriting more than $10 million? >> i will correct your numbers at the end of this year, it goes back to a million dollars. and it goes up to 55%. if you are trying to enrich yourself on inheritance, you are going to have an opportunity to pay your fair share. you're either going to pay a capital gains tax or income tax. why do the federal government believe it's necessary to cut into the ability of a family

put a business together to generate tax revenue for their public officials? why do they feel it's necessary? it is not necessary. it's an insidious tax that hurts small business. it doesn't matter whether it's 10% or 55%. 10 million or 1 million. it's not necessary and it's not right and it should be eliminated. >> senator tester. >> take a look at the fiscal condition we have in this country right now. we have to make choices. my choice is to make sure we make that $5 million per person, $10 million per couple, 35% tax rate permanent. index it so it doesn't drop back. what's really important with the inheritance tax and death tax, it's bounced all over the place. $2.5$5 million one day and million the next and it's been bounce all over.

you cannot plan for that. if it's made permanent, people can plan for it. people in agriculture can plan for it. small businesses can plan for it. they can put life insurance over that figure. it makes sense for them to do it. it's got to be made permanent. 5 and 10 is a sweet spot. it exempts almost everyone. almost every farm and flanch this state. >> representative rehberg, 30 seconds. >> tax problem in this country is spending problem. if you listening to what he's suggesting, he's suggesting we need to continue tax of a death of a loved one to feed a government that's out of control. why don't we control government first? that is what i support. i believe that we should put into permanent effect the tax relief for 2001 and 2003. i believe death tax should be zero. because it gives certainty. that's the biggest thing i hear as i travel around montana, they don't know what their taxes will be.

they don't know the effect of obamacare on them. is it going to cost them more to provide health insurance for their employee. is the employee possibly going to lose their health coverage from their employer? the whole uncertainty is created by the fiscal cliff because they have backed introduce a spending corner that is going to be so hard to dig our way back out of. now is the time. >> time is up. >> now a question from tom to senator tester. >> yes, senator. in april of 2011, you removed wolves from the federal and endangered species list. that happened in five states, including in montana. it included a rider. the rider -- the move was decried by environmentalists, saying it was a self-interested political move to endangered species act.

some fear it opened the door for other lawmakers to endanger species act protection. what do you tell montanans who voted for new 2006 but oppose your act actions to delist wolves? >> there was a recovery effort on wolves and it worked. we ought to be doing back flips on that. they are recovered. now let's manage them. they no longer need to be on the endangered species list. let us manage them like we do deer. it took a lot of work to get this done. there were a lot of folks out there -- the administration being one -- that really didn't want to see this happen. we worked and we worked together with folks on both sides of the aisle. we worked with conservationist that understood that wolves will recover. we worked with folks with the livestock industry and this was the right thing to do. it's fine to make decisions but

you need to go back and monitor those decisions. it really goes back to jackie's question on earmarks. we ought to go back and monitor and see what is not doing right. we monitored the wolves on the endangered species list. we got that done by working with republican out of idaho. >> representative rehberg, one minute. >> wolf recovery is a perfect example is what's wrong with the endangered species act. i worked in 2005 when we passed legislation in the house of representatives to reform the endangered species act. so we know where the end zone was so we would know when we recovered a species, it will be delisted. this was not a decision made by obama administration. it was a judge who reversed the position who changed the future of wolf recovery. it changed the goal posts. what we need ultimately need we needed an endangered reform act. it's not working for the betterment of the endangered species and there's nobody in this room, nobody in montana

that wanted to endangered species. that want species to disappear from the face of the earth. the point is we need certainty. we need to work together to delist it. turn management back over to the state. the solution and compromise came up was stopgap. it should be delisted. it still allows the u.s. fish and wildlife service to have an influence. the management should be sent back to the state as we have proposed in my legislation. >> the problem is, legislation didn't make it out of committee. still setting there. we got a bill we can get bipartisan support for and get passed. it was done after talking with sportsmen and livestock producers and conservationist across the board. it was the right thing to do for the wolves. it was the right thing to do for montana. we got it done. >> now a question from jackie from representative rehberg. >> congressman, i just can't